Alexander Palace Forum

Discussions about the Imperial Family and European Royalty => French Royals => Topic started by: Robby on August 16, 2005, 10:15:25 AM

Title: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Robby on August 16, 2005, 10:15:25 AM


(http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b314/Robby_/Mariemetkidz.jpg)
Maria with her children in the Versailles park.

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on August 16, 2005, 05:17:43 PM
A very famous one by Vigee-le-Brun:

(http://daily.greencine.com/archives/marie-antoinette.jpg)

Lady in red:

(http://www.drhuber.at/medizin/images/marie_antoinette.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: PssMarieAmelie on August 16, 2005, 09:05:17 PM
With her children. The little cot is empty because Marie's last child, Princess Sophie, died before the painting was finished.

(http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y215/pssmarieamelie/vigeelebrun2_big.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Lisa on August 17, 2005, 02:33:00 AM
Nice site about Marie Antoinette: I recommand the gallery:
http://www.marie-antoinette.org/
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Marc on August 17, 2005, 07:45:39 AM
(http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a42/breezer22/MAnt.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Marc on August 17, 2005, 07:47:01 AM
Marie Antoinette still as Maria Antonia-Archduchess of Austria!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Lisa on August 17, 2005, 07:54:41 AM
by Jacques Louis DAVID, 1793, Louvre:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v393/lyzotchka/702david.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on August 17, 2005, 10:43:04 AM
Here hair has been cut there, in preparation for the guillotine . . .
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Robby on August 17, 2005, 03:50:01 PM
In the movie 'Marie Antoinette' from 1938 with Norma Shearer and Tryone Power and more you can see, that she looks like the drawing that Lisa posted.
But i have a question, why did she wore a little hat? Her head will be well you know...cut off. So why?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: RomanovFan on August 17, 2005, 05:51:25 PM
The bonnet Marie-Antoinette wore to her execution on October 16, 1793, was taken off just before she was put under the guiotillne (I'm never sure how to spell that word! ???). I don't know why she wore a bonnet to her execution.... she was only 38 or so when she died.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Grand Duke on August 19, 2005, 06:14:48 PM
Marie Antoinette, painted by Wagenschon shortly after her marriage in 1770.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/71/MarieAntoinette1769-70.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: RomanovFan on August 19, 2005, 10:13:02 PM
I've never seen that painting of MA at the piano, Grand Duke. Is it a very famous one or no?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: etonexile on August 20, 2005, 11:08:21 AM
Women often wore small caps of fabric or lace at this time...a last bit of femine finery for the dear,doomed queen.....
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mgmstl on August 20, 2005, 12:28:36 PM
Axel Fersen, planned and financed the ill fated flight to Varennes.   He was a Swedish Count, and minister to the King, I believe he rose highly in the Swedish King, to Grand Marshal of the Kingdom.  He also never forgot 16 Oct 1789.  He writes about it in his diary each passing year, undoubtedly Marie Antoinette was the love of his life.

On the sudden death of the heir apparent he was mistakenly believed to have poisoned him, and at his funeral on the 20 June 1810, Fersen was attacked by a mob and beaten to death.  The heir was not poisoned, and died of an apoplectic attack.  He never recovered the funds promised him from helping the King & Queen
escape France, however he did see Madame Royale in Vienna once if not twice, but the Hapsburgs did not want him near the Princess.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: ilyala on August 22, 2005, 01:06:36 AM
maybe everyone knows about this but i thought it was cute and wanted to mention it:

when mozart was 6 and was taken to the maria theresa court to play, he played so well that maria theresa was impressed and congratulated him and asked what he wanted (you know, as a reward)... he said 'to marry her!' and pointed to marie antoinette :D
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on August 22, 2005, 04:59:28 AM
Quote
maybe everyone knows about this but i thought it was cute and wanted to mention it:

when mozart was 6 and was taken to the maria theresa court to play, he played so well that maria theresa was impressed and congratulated him and asked what he wanted (you know, as a reward)... he said 'to marry her!' and pointed to marie antoinette :D


I've heard different versions of this story. One has Mozart falling on the stage and MA helping him up so he pledges to marry her. Also, Maria Theresa kissed him, and when he was performing at another court and the Queen there would not kiss him he said 'But the Empress did!'

On a side note, I recently read on wikipedia that Antonia Fraser's Marie-Antoinette: The Journey is being made into a film, with Kirsten Dunst as MA.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: PssMarieAmelie on August 23, 2005, 06:32:47 AM
Quote

I've heard different versions of this story. One has Mozart falling on the stage and MA helping him up so he pledges to marry her. Also, Maria Theresa kissed him, and when he was performing at another court and the Queen there would not kiss him he said 'But the Empress did!'

On a side note, I recently read on wikipedia that Antonia Fraser's Marie-Antoinette: The Journey is being made into a film, with Kirsten Dunst as MA.




Who is playing Fersen?? I admit to finding Tyrone Power a bit "hot" when I saw him play Fersen on the 1936(??) version of marie antoinette with Norma Shearer.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on August 23, 2005, 06:43:12 AM
Quote



Who is playing Fersen?? I admit to finding Tyrone Power a bit "hot" when I saw him play Fersen on the 1936(??) version of marie antoinette with Norma Shearer.


I wish I could tell you, but that's about all I know . . . ???
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Grand Duke on August 23, 2005, 04:06:40 PM
Quote
Who is playing Fersen?? I admit to finding Tyrone Power a bit "hot" when I saw him play Fersen on the 1936(??) version of marie antoinette with Norma Shearer.


Prince Lieven doens't know but I know that Fersen will be played by Jamie Dornan (I think he is a fashion model and it will be is 1st movie  :P)

I just went to IMDB to find!  ;D
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on August 23, 2005, 06:20:26 PM
Quote

Prince Lieven doens't know but I know that Fersen will be played by Jamie Dornan (I think he is a fashion model and it will be is 1st movie  :P)

I just went to IMDB to find!  ;D


Well, I'm glad someone knows! thanks Grand Duke!  :)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: clockworkgirl21 on August 23, 2005, 09:49:34 PM
(http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/8533/17836sx.jpg)
(http://img375.imageshack.us/img375/2731/g2xf.png)
(http://img377.imageshack.us/img377/4814/gh9qn.png)
(http://img367.imageshack.us/img367/4520/big8xd.png)
(http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/4435/jj8qk.png)
(http://img376.imageshack.us/img376/1418/h3ds.png)
(http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/6484/q4xb.png)
(http://img400.imageshack.us/img400/1534/r3ad.png)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: clockworkgirl21 on August 24, 2005, 05:09:15 PM
Actually, I've asked this before, but got no answer. I read in the Royal Diaries book about Marie Antoinette that she had to take her Austrian clothes off in front of all those women and get her French clothes. She also had to take her baths in front of other women. I know those diaries aren't very accurate, so what really happened?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: umigon on August 24, 2005, 05:38:18 PM


I don't know much about this case in particular, but it was an ancient costume. The new Queen or Princess of a European country, when married to a foreign prince, had to throw away her old clothes to follow the fashion of her new country.

Marie Louise of Orleans, for example, when married to Carlos II of Spain, was forced to abandon her beautiful and shiny French clothes for the more austere style of the Spanish Court!

I imagine you refer to the same thing!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on August 24, 2005, 05:44:53 PM
Well, I read that it's just an urban legend that Marie Antoinette had to strip off in front of her future husband . . . Isabeau of Bavaria is rumoured to have done this too.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: ilyala on August 25, 2005, 06:33:07 AM
so typical to cast a handsome model to play an actor's role...  :-/
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on August 25, 2005, 06:34:52 AM
Quote
so typical to cast a handsome model to play an actor's role...  :-/


I don't think you'll be complaining when you see him, ilyala.  ;D
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Lisa on August 25, 2005, 12:46:52 PM
It's is not a legend! It's true... :)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on August 25, 2005, 01:51:59 PM
Quote
It's is not a legend! It's true... :)


Really? How did you learn it is true?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Louis_Charles on August 25, 2005, 04:23:32 PM
A pavillion was built on an island in the river the demarcated the border between French and foreign territory. She entered it clothed in Austrian clothes, with her Austrian attendants, and then removed every vestige of her native accoutrements, down to the skin. When she left she was dressed as a Frenchwoman, her hair re-done to French custom, and she was attended by French noble ladies. She was then escorted to Louis XV as the Dauphine of France.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: ilyala on August 25, 2005, 07:52:27 PM
i will if he plays badly...

if i wanna see a beautiful face i look at a pic. when i watch a movie i expect some acting :P
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on August 26, 2005, 07:52:06 AM
Well said ilyala, but let's not write him off before we see hi act.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Lisa on August 26, 2005, 06:16:29 PM
...Louis-Charles answered for me! ;D It is a well-known episode by the French historians.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Frederika on August 27, 2005, 04:21:45 AM
Marie antoinette had to take al her clothes off in front of the court as well ass dress bath and give birth as it was somthing of a french tradition started by Louis XIV who made his whole court watch him do every thing.

Marie antoinette also never said "let them eat cake" when she hered the parisians were staving it was a combanation of a mix up and a rumer it was actualy said by Marie Theres the wife of Louis XIV.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: umigon on August 27, 2005, 05:50:22 AM


Not Marie Thérèse, Fredericka, it was Madame Victoire, aunt of Louis XVI and she said:
`
'Oh! They have no bread to eat... then they should get used to eating the crusts of our cakes'
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on August 27, 2005, 05:54:17 AM
Quote

Not Marie Thérèse, Fredericka, it was Madame Victoire, aunt of Louis XVI and she said:
`
'Oh! They have no bread to eat... then they should get used to eating the crusts of our cakes'


I've heard different stories abou this - some, like umigon, say it was Victoire, others say Marie Therese, other still say is as far back as Anne of Austria! The one thing we can be sure of is that Marie Antoinette never said it.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: umigon on August 27, 2005, 05:57:33 AM


No, Marie Antoinette had her own frivolous behaviour but she never said that. I know that Madame Victoire's comment was done in the presence of both the Spanish and the Austrian ambassadors and she said it in 1789. After knowing about the storming of the Bastille, she asked that why had the people started a revolution?Someone answered her that they claimed they had no bread to eat. So, she answered the other thing!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on August 27, 2005, 06:00:22 AM
Gosh, she really asked why there was a revolution?  ??? The 'Royal Aunts' really must have lived in a very sheltered little world of their own . . .
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Louis_Charles on August 27, 2005, 02:49:24 PM
The three of them that lived at Versailles --- I think there was a fourth, Clothilde (?), who became a nun --- were responsible for a great deal of Marie Antoinette's early misfortunes. They primed her to oppose Mme. DuBarry, thereby incurring the displeasure of Louis XV, and they worked both ends against the middle, pretending to be her friend and at the same time speaking against the Austrian alliance.

And yes, they skipped France almost as soon as the Revolution began. I have always thought it was a measure of Mare Antoinette's essential sweetness of character that she was concerned about them and their fortunes until the very end of her life.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on August 27, 2005, 03:49:46 PM
Yes, the aunts high-tailed it at the first sign of trouble . . . And I agree that Marie-Antoinette was kind to remember them fondly . . . she certainly had no reason to like them.  >:(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Louis_Charles on August 27, 2005, 05:27:54 PM
Thanks for the information, Michael, I am at the theatre and away from my library! Adelaide is usually regarded as the dominant personality in the trio, nicht wahr?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on August 27, 2005, 05:36:37 PM
Quote
Thanks for the information, Michael, I am at the theatre and away from my library! Adelaide is usually regarded as the dominant personality in the trio, nicht wahr?


Really? I thought it was Victoire?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: clockworkgirl21 on August 29, 2005, 01:44:15 AM
(http://img367.imageshack.us/img367/1970/262dee413fr.jpg)
(http://img366.imageshack.us/img366/6937/1776mawithglobe9ec.jpg)
(http://img371.imageshack.us/img371/1641/1780mafashionpose0lc.jpg)
(http://img380.imageshack.us/img380/1401/1793lastmeeting4su.jpg)
(http://img368.imageshack.us/img368/2206/antoinetteinvienna4zj.jpg)
(http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/9890/lamballeneckhair6aq.jpg)
(http://img375.imageshack.us/img375/9831/lamballeseated6gy.jpg)
(http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/1935/queentiedbehindherback1gm.jpg)
(http://img369.imageshack.us/img369/2605/rideontumbril14bw.jpg)
Some more.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on September 03, 2005, 12:57:02 PM
Not a very beautiful woman, IMO . . .
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: russianlover76 on September 24, 2005, 09:10:40 AM
What ever happen to her children before she was executed? :)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on September 24, 2005, 09:29:45 AM
Before the Revolution, they lived as any other royal children. With the Revolution underway, they were imprisoned with their parents, until they were separated from each other - the King and the Dauphin were taken away. Marie Therese stayed with her mother and Aunt Elisabeth until MA was executed, as Elisabeth was later.  :-/
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Robert_Hall on September 24, 2005, 11:03:50 AM
Marie Therese [Madame Royale] was later exchanged for French prisoners to the Austrian court. She then married the son of Charles X,[her first cousin as the king was her uncle] and became Duchesse Angouleme.  She died in 1851, childless and some say a rather embittered woman. I suppose she had a right to be that way, considering what she went through.
Incidently, for a short time her husband was actually Louis XIX, King of France, making her Queen. In actuality he was Head of the Royal House from 1836-1844.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on September 30, 2005, 06:22:22 PM
Marie Antoniette by Vigee le Brun:

(http://www.abcgallery.com/V/vigeelebrun/vigeelebrun4.JPG)



(http://www.drhuber.at/medizin/images/marie_antoinette.jpg)

Another Vigee Le Brun. Marie Antoinette with her three children. The fourth, Sophie Beatrix, had been painted in the cradle but was painted over when she died young:

(http://www.csupomona.edu/~plin/women/images/vigeelebrun2_big.jpg)

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on September 30, 2005, 06:28:17 PM



And her execution:

(http://www.bartleby.com/86/5502.gif)


Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on September 30, 2005, 06:31:44 PM
(http://kleioscoop.digischool.nl/marie%20antoinette.jpg)

With Louis:

(http://www.zum.de/Faecher/G/BW/neuzeit/frzrev/louis16_1.jpg)

(http://www.nndb.com/people/185/000085927/marie-antoinette-1-sized.jpg)

(http://www.ladyreading.net/marieantoinette/big/marie22.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Helene on October 01, 2005, 01:07:28 AM


http://www.photo.rmn.fr/LowRes2/TR1/MS4GY/03-005064.jpg

http://www.photo.rmn.fr/LowRes2/TR1/FHBJ0/99-018987.jpg

http://www.photo.rmn.fr/LowRes2/TR1/71NWFJ/99-010616.jpg

http://www.photo.rmn.fr/LowRes2/TR1/PMF5VT/98-007390.jpg

http://www.photo.rmn.fr/LowRes2/TR1/Q3TRLC/79-001325-02.jpg

http://www.photo.rmn.fr/LowRes2/TR1/ILMOSV/79-001321-02.jpg

http://www.photo.rmn.fr/LowRes2/TR1/XGNWFJ/92-004945-02.jpg

http://www.photo.rmn.fr/LowRes2/TR1/BH3I0G/93-000736-02.jpg

http://www.photo.rmn.fr/LowRes2/TR1/HW0KEZ/88-004324.jpg

http://www.photo.rmn.fr/LowRes2/TR1/R1X0DO/03-011336.jpg

http://www.photo.rmn.fr/LowRes2/TR1/HWL8NH/96-004351.jpg
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 01, 2005, 06:08:23 AM
Well, Helene, I think between us we have posted every portrait of MA ever painted!  ;D
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Helene on October 01, 2005, 10:13:37 AM
I searched the links of the pictures so I modify my previous post. I will try, now, each times is possible, to put the links  ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Alexander_II on October 08, 2005, 08:44:16 AM
When Louis XV wed his eldest daughter, Louise-Elisabeth 29.08.1727 - 06.12.1759 to Philip, Duke of Parma he was heartbroken following her departure to Italy.  He thereafter forbid his remaining daughters to ever marry.  These were in order Adelaide 23.03.1732 - 27.02.1800, Victoire-Louise 11.05.1733 - 07.06.1799, Sophie-Philippine 17.07.1734 - 03.03.1782 who happened to be Marie Antoinette's favourite and Louise-Marie 05.07.1737 - 23.12.1787.  These women were remarkable beauties.  Whilst I'm sure they all took lovers in secret, their fathers selfishness turned them into intriguing, meddlesome spinsters.

Upon the death of Marie Therese, Duchesse d'Augouleme, she left a sealed document titled The Fate of Louis XVII which in accordance with her will was to remain sealed and not to be opened for I believe 150 years.  Has anyone heard of this document or more importantly since the time has now elapsed the contents?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 08, 2005, 11:45:47 AM
Quote
When Louis XV wed his eldest daughter, Louise-Elisabeth 29.08.1727 - 06.12.1759 to Philip, Duke of Parma he was heartbroken following her departure to Italy.  He thereafter forbid his remaining daughters to ever marry.  These were in order Adelaide 23.03.1732 - 27.02.1800, Victoire-Louise 11.05.1733 - 07.06.1799, Sophie-Philippine 17.07.1734 - 03.03.1782 who happened to be Marie Antoinette's favourite and Louise-Marie 05.07.1737 - 23.12.1787.  



...and Henriette-Anne, Louise's twin 1727-1752. There was another daughter alive at the time of Louise-Elisabeth's marriage, Thérèse Félicité, who died in 1744.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Alexander_II on October 08, 2005, 09:10:08 PM
Louis XV and Marie Leszczynska had 10 children in total.  There was in fact another daughter, Marie-Louise 28.07.1728 - 19.02.1733 however these additional siblings were not listed because they had all passed away prior to Marie Antoinette's coming to France.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: lancashireladandre on October 09, 2005, 01:41:06 PM
Madame Elisabeth had the chance to leave France when her surviving aunts Adelaide & Victorie fled to Rome.She refused however as she had earlier refused offers of marriage to remain at her brothers side. This decision cost her, her liberty & eventually her life. She was the last of 2 dozen women executed on May 10th 1794.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 23, 2005, 02:05:18 PM
Madame Elisabeth of France was a very devout Catholic and wanted to become a nun, but her brother King Louis XVI asked her to stay with the family. It is good that she did, too, because she gave great support to Marie-Antoinette in prison after the king was executed and the little Dauphin was taken away and brutalized. Madame Elisabeth also comforted  her neice, the young Marie-Therese, in prison, after the girl's parents the King and Queen were guillotined.

The  youngest aunt of Louis XVI and Madame Elisabeth, Madame Louise, daughter of Louis XV, became a Carmelite nun when she was about 30 years old. She was poisoned by an anonymous letter and died right before the Revolution broke out in 1788. The cause for the beatification of Madame Louise, or Mother Therese of Saint Augustine (as she was known in religion) has been introduced in the Church of Rome.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 23, 2005, 02:13:26 PM
Thank you for these magnificent pictures of the beautiful queen.  I love the Lady in Red!! I am so upset that Kirsten Dunst is going to play Marie-Antoinette in the new Sophia Coppola movie. Kirsten is pretty but does not have the ethereal quality that Marie-Antoinette had, as seen in these portraits and testified by contemporaries, who spoke of her "heavenly eyes." (Kate Winslet would have been a better choice, IMO.)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 23, 2005, 02:58:47 PM
Quote

The  youngest aunt of Louis XVI and Madame Elisabeth, Madame Louise, daughter of Louis XV, became a Carmelite nun when she was about 30 years old. She was poisoned by an anonymous letter and died right before the Revolution broke out in 1788. The cause for the beatification of Madame Louise, or Mother Therese of Saint Augustine (as she was known in religion) has been introduced in the Church of Rome.


Hey, welcome to the forum, Elena Maria!  :)

Gosh, who would have wanted to poison Madam Louise?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 23, 2005, 03:00:05 PM
Yes, I had my doubts about Kirsten too, but let's give her a chance before we condemn her, eh?  :)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 23, 2005, 03:12:09 PM
Thank you, Prince! I am still learning how this forum works, so forgive any mistakes, please. No one knows who poisoned Madame Louise, but given the anti-clerical sentiments in France at the time, it could have been someone from the revolutionary element. (Many nuns were guillotined once the Revolution got underway, including the 16 Carmelites of Compiegne, whose Mother Prioress was given her dowry by Marie-Antoinette. There was a long-standing connection between the Bourbons and the austere Order of Carmel, believe it or not, probably going back to when Louis XIV's ex-mistress Louise de la Valliere entered the cloister.) As for Madame Louise, she became deathly ill after opening an envelope, allegedly containing "Relics of the Eternal Father," which actually contained nothing but feathers and a mysterious powder. Very sad, since she was close to Louis XVI.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 23, 2005, 03:16:34 PM
Quote
Thank you, Prince! I am still learning how this forum works, so forgive any mistakes, please. No one knows who poisoned Madame Louise, but given the anti-clerical sentiments in France at the time, it could have been someone from the revolutionary element. (Many nuns were guillotined once the Revolution got underway, including the 16 Carmelites of Compiegne, whose Mother Prioress was given her dowry by Marie-Antoinette. There was a long-standing connection between the Bourbons and the austere Order of Carmel, believe it or not, probably going back to when Louis XIV's ex-mistress Louise de la Valliere entered the cloister.) As for Madame Louise, she became deathly ill after opening an envelope, allegedly containing "Relics of the Eternal Father," which actually contained nothing but feathers and a mysterious powder. Very sad, since she was close to Louis XVI.


I've never heard this story! :o Did Louis XVI try to find out who had sent the letter to his aunt? It sounds a bit like the Anthrax letters that were sent shortly after 9/11!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 23, 2005, 03:16:58 PM
There are actually pictures on Kirsten Dunst's homepage from the new film. She does not look bad, and I would never condemn her, but she would not have been my choice.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 23, 2005, 03:17:32 PM
Thanks for that Elena Maria! It's obvious you'll be a wonderful addition to the French board!  :D

Poor Madam Louise . . . this powder, could it have been something like anthrax?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 23, 2005, 03:18:13 PM
Quote

I've never heard this story! :o Did Louis XVI try to find out who had sent the letter to his aunt? It sounds a bit like the Anthrax letters that were sent shortly after 9/11!


LOL, looks like we posted at the same time Bell. That's great minds for you.  ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 23, 2005, 03:20:51 PM
Maybe arsenic. I don't think they ever analyzed it.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 23, 2005, 03:22:24 PM
Quote
Maybe arsenic. I don't think they ever analyzed it.


Arsenic wouldn't have killed her straight away though. They would have had to send several letters with arsenic in.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 23, 2005, 03:58:46 PM
I so enjoy these pictures and all the accompanying commentary. I must insert one comment, however, about the alleged affair between Marie-Antoinette and Count Axel von Fersen. I realize that Antonia Fraser and Evelyn Lever  and others believed that such an affair occured, but the great British historian Nesta Webster, who wrote several serious history books on the French Revolution (not just popular biographies) did not believe the two were anything more than good friends.  The scholar Simon Schama, author of "Citizens" also denies that a physical relationship took place, as does Marie-Antoinette's previous biographers Desmond Seward and Hilaire Belloc. It is a controversial issue and it is not of unamimous consensus among scholars that Fersen was Antoinette's lover, not in the same way that EVERYONE knew who Talleyrand was sleeping with at any given time or who were the Comte d'Artois' various mistresses.

Marie-Antoinette always had rumors swirling about her because of her flirtatious and vivacious nature, but those in her inner circle steadfastly testified to her honor and virtue.  "Her soul was as white as her face" one contemporary said of her.  She had her faults but she was always a practicing Roman Catholic in good standing, confessing and receiving Communion regularly.

From her letters one can see that her main preoccupation was with her husband and children, and keeping the throne for her son. Whatever her feelings were for Count Fersen, she refused to leave her husband, even when he begged her to go for her safety. She had many opportunities after the Revolution began to escape without Louis (she could have gone off with Fersen and lived happily with him in exile) but she would not go. She said to Louis (as recorded by Madame de Lamballe): "I will die at your feet with the children in my arms." This was par for the course for a daughter of Empress Maria Teresa, who inculcated into all of her daughters marital fidelity. After Louis died, she could have escaped again (there were plots) but she adamantly refused to leave her children behind. Whatever she felt for Fersen, her family came first.

Sorry for the length of this message, but I do not like to see it taken for granted that Marie-Antoinette was a faithless wife, in spite of her early marital travails. It may be true that she fell in love with another man; she was human, but she did not make a lifestyle of adultery, unlike others at the French court.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 23, 2005, 04:35:19 PM
LOL, don't worry about the length of the post - the longer it is, the more thought put into it!

I agree that we cannot say for sure that the Fersen affair is the truth - Marie Antoinette has become such a controversial figure, we have to take virtually everything said about her with a pinch of salt. Yes, she was a practising Roman Catholic - but then again, so was Minette, Duchess d'Orleans, and many people here believe she was unfaithful to her husband.

We'll never know the truth, but it's fun to speculate.  :)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: umigon on October 23, 2005, 04:39:22 PM
Quote
LOL, don't worry about the length of the post - the longer it is, the more thought put into it!

I agree that we cannot say for sure that the Fersen affair is the truth - Marie Antoinette has become such a controversial figure, we have to take virtually everything said about her with a pinch of salt. Yes, she was a practising Roman Catholic - but then again, so was Minette, Duchess d'Orleans, and many people here believe she was unfaithful to her husband.

We'll never know the truth, but it's fun to speculate.  :)



Minette was unfaithful! :) ;D ;D

Welcome Elena María, it's wonderful to have someone with such a knowledge in 18th century France's history!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 23, 2005, 04:41:08 PM
Quote


Minette was unfaithful! :) ;D ;D

Welcome Elena María, it's wonderful to have someone with such a knowledge in 18th century France's history!


I thought we agreed to disagree about this one, my friend!  ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: umigon on October 23, 2005, 04:49:53 PM
Quote

I thought we agreed to disagree about this one, my friend!  ;)



Ok, I guess we did... >:( hehe
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 23, 2005, 04:54:30 PM
Pertaining to the Vigee-Lebrun portrait of M-A in her red gown, seated, with three of her children, there is another interpretation of it that may be of interest. It is often assumed that the Baby Madame Sophie had just died, but I also have read that in that portrait she had not yet been born. Marie-Antoinette is actually pregnant in the painting, and if one looks closely it can be seen that she is rather full-figured and wearing a maternity gown, with adjustable, open front. The painting was intended to help raise the Queen's waning popularity with the people, for she is shown as a fruitful, bountiful mother, of her own children and of the French. Her glowing, serene countenance is that of a happy expectant mother and the children are joyfully helping to prepare the cradle for the new baby. The large piece of furniture in the background is the queen's famous jewelry cabinet, the point being that the queen's actual jewels were her precious children. After the Dauphin Louis-Joseph died in June 1789, the queen had the painting put away; she could not bear to look at it again.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 23, 2005, 04:55:58 PM
Ooh, thanks for that Elena Maria! I never heard that before - an interesting interperatation . . .
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 23, 2005, 05:06:05 PM
If by Minette, you mean Henriette-Anne d'Angleterre, sister of Charles II, wife of Phillippe d'Orleans, no I don't think she had an affair with Louis XIV, although she was close to it. Her mother-in-law broke it up before it went to far, by sending Louise de la Valliere to distract Louis. And the rest is history.....

Poor Minette, whatever she did in life, died a saintly death. Phillippe was not the easiest husband in the world.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 23, 2005, 05:09:57 PM
Yay, someone who agrees with me!!  ;D ;D Still, Minette has her own thread for this sort of discussion!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 23, 2005, 06:22:42 PM
I have no idea then what it was. But it killed her.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 24, 2005, 08:25:57 AM
Madame Campan writes the following about Madame Louise in her memoirs:

I saw Madame Louise two or three times more at the grating.  I was informed of her death by Louis XVI.  “My Aunt Louise,” said he to me, “your old mistress, is just dead at St. Denis.  I have this moment received intelligence of it.  Her piety and resignation were admirable, and yet the delirium of my good aunt recalled to her recollection that she was a princess, for her last words were, ’To paradise, haste, haste, full speed.’  No doubt she thought she was again giving orders to her equerry.”

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 24, 2005, 08:55:51 AM
Madame Louise was a Bourbon to the end!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 24, 2005, 09:33:07 AM
I wanted to add that I was not able to find anything about the poison account of the death of Madame Louise in any contemporary memoirs. It seems to be a more of a tradition in the Carmelite order, I believe, where she was more or less venerated as a martyr. I read of it in an old 19th cent biography  of Madame Louise whose author I do not recall, but it may have been a nun. The book was in a monastery library  to which I no longer have access - - so I have no way to substantiate my claim except my memory of the book. So, believe it or not...it is probably more of a legend, but an interesting one.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 24, 2005, 09:40:01 AM
Also, Madame Campan, the femme de chambre of Marie-Antoinette after she became queen, had originally been the Reader to the Mesdames Tantes (Madame Adelaide, Madame Sophie, Madame Victoire and Madame Louise.) Marie-Antoinette met her when she would go the visit the aunts, and liked her and later took her into her service. (That is probably covered in another thread -sorry to digress.)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 24, 2005, 09:51:41 AM
Quote
I wanted to add that I was not able to find anything about the poison account of the death of Madame Louise in any contemporary memoirs. It seems to be a more of a tradition in the Carmelite order, I believe, where she was more or less venerated as a martyr. I read of it in an old 19th cent biography  of Madame Louise whose author I do not recall, but it may have been a nun. The book was in a monastery library  to which I no longer have access - - so I have no way to substantiate my claim except my memory of the book. So, believe it or not...it is probably more of a legend, but an interesting one.


Well, I believe you, elena_maria_vidal, because it's such a great story!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 24, 2005, 12:03:50 PM
 Thank you, Bell the Cat and since you brought up Madame Campan's Memoirs, perhaps you can check something for me, which has to do with Marie-Antoinette's arrival in France, the original topic of this thread. (The only copy I had was inter-library loan.) I remember in the back of the Memoirs there was sort of an appendix of miscellaneous stories about the French court, gleaned from Madame Campan's  experiences there, which were extensive, especially the time she must have spent listening to the gossip of Mesdames Tantes. Anyway, Madame Campan mentions in the back of her book the young girls, often VERY young, who would be brought in for Louis XV, so that nowadays he would probably be regarded as a child molestor. It is disturbing to read. I don't remember if Madame Campan says that Madame la Marquise de Pompadour procured the girls for him, but I know that I have read elsewhere that La Pompadour (who was known to be frigid in spite of being Maitresse en titre)  practically acted in the capacity of a Madam at a brothel for Louis XV. This was shocking to anyone of any degree of minimal decency at the Court and especially to the Royal Family, who loathed La Pompadour (for her anti-clericalism as well as for the obvious reasons).

Let us recall that it was La Pompadour who arranged the marriage of the Dauphin (the future Louis XVI) with Archduchess Maria-Antonia of Lorraine-Austria. Although La Pompadour died before Marie-Antoinette came to France, and Marie-Antoinette never met the woman or had any contact with her at all, it stained the young princess in the eyes of the French Royal Family. Many at Court were against her before before she even set foot on French soil. The Duc de Choiseul, friend of La Pompadour, also engineered the Austrian alliance. He was also anti-Catholic and an enemy of the Dauphin. All of this may have precipitated the coldness with which the future Louis XVI treated his bride when she first came to Versailles (rather than the alleged sexual malfunction as is popularly thought.)

Marie-Antoinette made le Petit Trianon her private retreat. Petit Trianon had originally been built for La Pompadour, whose Christian name, BTW, was "Jeanne-Antoinette."  I think that the association of M-A with La Pompadour in the minds of the Court and of the masses did not help M-A's reputation and caused things to go against her from the beginning.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 24, 2005, 01:15:26 PM
The entire memoirs are available online at

http://www.authorama.com/memoirs-of-marie-antoinette-3.html

Yes it's generally accepted that Mme de Pompadour procured young girls for Louis XV at the Parc aux Cerfs, but that this arrangement was discontinued when he took up with Mme Dubarry.

As you say this chapter has lots of gossip on Mesdames, and funny stories such as when Louis XV asked her where "Piggy" was and she had to be told afterwards that this was his nickname for Mme Victoire!
I sometimes wonder whether Campan is a reliable source though.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: palatine on October 24, 2005, 01:16:55 PM
According to one of her best biographers, Nancy Mitford, Madame de Pompadour knew about the Parc aux Cerfs, but had nothing to do with it, and certainly did not procure women for it.  Pompadour didn't care if Louis XV had other mistresses there, so long as his heart belonged to her, which it did.  The Concierge de Versailles, Dominique-Guillaume Lebel, was the one who actually procured girls for Louis XV.  

According to Mitford:

"After the French Revolution, when the Monarchy was being blackened in every possible way, fabulous stories were told about the Parc aux Cerfs.  It was said to have been a harem fit for a sultan, the scene of orgies without name, and to have cost the country milions.  In fact, it was a modest little private brothel, run on humane and practical lines."

At the end of Campan's Memoirs, there is a section of Anecdotes about the reign of Louis XV.  Campan discusses how Mademoiselle de Romans joined the Parc aux Cerfs.  According to Campan, Louis XV saw the girl, beautifully dressed and accompanied by shabbily dressed parents, while he was passing through Paris; she appeared to be about 12-13.  Louis XV correctly realized that the parents were trying to get his attention with their daughter; there was great prestige in being a mistress of the king.  Louis XV sent Lebel to find out who she was.  The parents came to terms with Louis XV, and he began financially supporting the family.  When Mademoiselle de Romans was 15, she became his mistress, with the full consent of her parents.  

According to Mitford, Mademoiselle de Romans refused to join the Parc aux Cerfs, so Louis XV bought a house for her.  She eventually had a son, the only illegitimate child Louis XV ever recognized.  The son became a priest, l'Abbe de Bourbon, and was a pet of the daughters of Louis XV, but he died of smallpox in his twenties.  After their son was born, Mademoiselle de Romans began to put on airs, and Louis XV dumped her.  She eventually got married, which some felt lowered her prestige.

I don't think Marie Antoinette was unpopular just because Madame de Pompadour arranged her wedding.  I think her unpopularity was due to a combination of factors, such as the fact that she was an Austrian princess, the fact that her home life had been informal compared to the French Court, and the fact that she simply could not adjust quickly enough to the importance of etiquette and precedence at the French Court, quickly making enemies among the nobility.  Marie Antoinette did not understand that Louis XIV put all those rules in place for a reason, and, unfortunately, Madame l'Etiquette could not explain to her why following the rules was so important.    

All of this is just my opinion and feel free to disagree.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 24, 2005, 01:52:38 PM
Thanks for the link  to Madame Campan, Bell The Cat and Palatine, for the details of the amours of LouisXV. ( I am amused by Nancy Mitford, as always and her indulgent comment about the "private little brothel." It has been a long time since I read her biography of La Pompadour.)
Palatine, I do not think that Mme Pompadour's arranging of the marriage of M-A was the cause of M-A's downfall; there were many factors, as you say. I do think it contributed to her getting off to a bad start in France.  

It is a joy to discuss these things with such knowledgeable people! Thank you!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: palatine on October 24, 2005, 01:54:16 PM
I don't think we will ever know the truth about whether Marie Antoinette and Axel von Fersen had an affair.  I do think its true that Marie Antoinette would never have left Louis XVI for him.  She had a strong sense of dynastic responsibility, and I think she did love Louis, in her own way.  Unfortunately, their marriage was not a happy one; they were too different.

There is a really great book about Axel von Fersen and Marie Antoinette called "The Fatal Friendship" by Stanley Loomis.  Loomis wrote several books about French history, including a biography of Madame du Barry and an excellent book, "Paris in the Terror", about Charlotte Corday, Madame Roland, and other personalities of the French Revolution.  Loomis believed that it was probable that Marie Antoinette and Fersen had an affair.   His books are well worth reading.

All of this is just my opinion, and feel free to disagree.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: palatine on October 24, 2005, 02:19:37 PM
Thanks for the poisoning story, Elena.   :)  That's one I had never heard before.  It is true that Mitford was something less than an admirer of Marie Antoinette; she takes several swipes at her in her biography of Pompadour.  Still, despite her biases, Mitford was a careful researcher, and I believe her when she writes that Pompadour had nothing to do with the Parc aux Cerfs.

Bell, Campan is considered a very reliable source.  Unfortunately, when she wrote her Memoirs, the Bourbons had recently been restored to power in France, and she was something of a persona non grata to the royal family, in spite of her services to Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette.  Campan wrote the book to pacify the royal family, and to remind them of her loyalty and past services.

The royal family was angry at Campan because after the French Revolution sputtered out, Campan opened a school for girls to make ends meet.  Her school became very fashionable; her connection to Marie Antoinette gave it snob appeal.  Napoleon and many of his marshals sent their daughters and sisters to her school.  Her pupils included Napoleon's sister Caroline and his stepdaughter Hortense.  When Napoleon's regime fell, Campan found herself in the black books of the royal family, since in their eyes she had collaborated with the enemy, so to speak.  

There is no doubt that Campan loved Marie Antoinette very deeply; she treasured one of the Queen's dresses.  Her book would have been guaranteed to be sympathetic anyway, but the fact that the royal family was angry at her must have been a factor when she wrote; she didn't want to make them any angrier.  Campan was honest enough to criticize members of the royal family in her book.  However, her goal was to provide a sympathetic portrait, and she succeeded.  

Unfortunately, Campan left some things out, rather than make the royal family angry.  As I recall, among other omissions, Campan leaves out Axel von Fersen.  Campan undoubtedly knew more than she told, not only about Fersen's involvement with the French royal family, but other things too.  Campan's Memoirs should still be considered an excellent source.

All of this is just my opinion and feel free to disagree.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 24, 2005, 02:35:39 PM
Here's another funny anecdote from Campan about Madame Louise:

She remained in her convent, whence she continued to solicit favours, as I knew from the complaints of the Queen, who often said to me, “Here is another letter from my Aunt Louise.  She is certainly the most intriguing little Carmelite in the kingdom.”  The Court went to visit her about three times a year, and I recollect that the Queen, intending to take her daughter there, ordered me to get a doll dressed like a Carmelite for her, that the young Princess might be accustomed, before she went into the convent, to the habit of her aunt, the nun.

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 24, 2005, 02:39:14 PM
Palatine,  the quote from Nancy Mitford - "it was a modest little private brothel, run on humane and practical lines" - is priceless!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 24, 2005, 02:41:05 PM
 Yes, I have read the ''Fatal Friendship" by Stanley Loomis at least twice. It is a good book although I disagree with him about Count Fersen sleeping with the Queen. There is a new book out which I have not read about the same subject. Vincent Cronin, who wrote the excellent "Louis And Antoinette" thinks Fersen and Antoinette had a one night stand in Feb 1792, when the Royal family were under house arrest in the Tuileries. I think he got this from Loomis and his interpretation of the scribbled out words in Fersen's diary. I personally never understood how it could have happened since the queen hardly ever had privacy at night (or any other time for that matter); the guards were always looking in on her and even the some of the servants were spies -- she was hardly able to be intimate with her own husband much less with another man. Also, as biographer Desmond Seward points out, after the death of her oldest son, M-A went through a deep religious transformation, and began following the "way of devotion" a la Madame Elisabeth, with whom she was practically inseparable at the Tuileries. She was also very close to Mme de Lamballe at the time, who had also become more devout. They were always sneaking non-juring priests into the Palace  so they could secretly go to confession. The atmosphere was more conducive to the spirit of the catacombs than to having rendez-vous with lovers, with Mme Elisabeth writing long spiritual letters to her confessor Abbe Edgeworth and so on. They knew death was not far away.

Just my opinion and as you say, feel free to disagree.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 24, 2005, 02:54:56 PM
Well, Palatine, I must disagree with you about Fersen and the Queen. I wrote my opinion at length on another thread and won't trouble you all with it here.

Also, I know that they always say that poor Madame Campan wrote highly of M-A in order to get back into the good graces of the Bourbons, but look at all the things she said about LouisXV and his ladies. And Charles X was devoted to the memory of his grandfather!! (See Memoirs of the Duchesse de Gontaut.)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 24, 2005, 03:02:25 PM
Quote

Also, I know that they always say that poor Madame Campan wrote highly of M-A in order to get back into the good graces of the Bourbons, but look at all the things she said about LouisXV and his ladies. And Charles X was devoted to the memory of his grandfather!! (See Memoirs of the Duchesse de Gontaut.)


To me mme Campan seems a bit too much like taking the mickey out of Louis' daughters, funny though her stories are. I think she was writing for a public that enjoyed stories that made the royals look ridiculous. Plus ca change........
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: palatine on October 24, 2005, 03:14:27 PM
Bell, I agree that Mitford was something of an apologist for Louis XV and Pompadour.  Still, it is true that the Parc aux Cerfs was made out to be worse than it actually was by many writers, and I think Mitford was somewhat defensive about it.    

Elena, I think Campan wrote her Memoirs sympathetically in part because the royal family was angry at her.  However, I strongly believe that she sincerely loved Marie Antoinette; if she hadn't, she would have fled early on, as so many others did, rather than stay with Marie Antoinette as long as she could.  I think her book reflects her genuine love for the royal family, even when she criticizes various members of it.  However, Campan wasn't writing in a vacuum, and I think she left things out rather than provide a warts and all portrait, which is unfortunate.  Campan was a fly on the wall for many things, including some of the machinations of the royal family as the revolution closed in on them.  Aside from the information she could have provided about Fersen, Campan probably could have clarified which politicians the royal family was secretly negotiating with, and so forth.  

I have never really understood why the royal family was angry with Campan over her school.  Campan was not rich; she ran her school to survive.  It would have been too dangerous for her to turn away pupils just because they were relatives of Napoleon and his marshals.  Unfortunately, the royal family did not agree.

All of this is just my opinion and feel free to disagree.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: veu on October 24, 2005, 03:23:30 PM
Quote
Not a very beautiful woman, IMO . . .



Not beautiful????? Marie Antoinette was one of the greatest  beauties of her time!!!! She was very very beautiful!!!!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 24, 2005, 03:29:41 PM
All a matter of opinion, my friend . . .
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 24, 2005, 03:32:09 PM
 Bell, I agree with you.

Palatine, my point is what you said elsewhere and what others have said: "We will never really know" for certain whether Fersen and M-A were physical lovers. What I resent is when people like Antonia Fraser and Carolly Erickson write about it as if it were a given fact of history, they way we have just been discussing Louis XV and La Pompadour (who undeniably were a given fact of history.) And then the new movie, based on Antonia Fraser's book, will probably take l'affaire Fersen and run with it. It does a great disservice to the Queen's memory.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: palatine on October 24, 2005, 03:36:16 PM
I am in the undecided camp; I'm not sure if Marie Antoinette and Fersen had an affair, though Loomis and others present a good case.  I wouldn't think any the less of her if she did have an affair; Marie Antoinette was one of the unhappiest and unluckiest women in history.  

One of the reasons against the theory that she had an affair with Fersen is the fact that Marie Antoinette was not well.  I am not sure if I saw it on TV or read it, but I believe there is some modern speculation that Marie Antoinette was suffering from ovarian or uterine cancer at the time of the Revolution.    

All of this is just my opinion and feel free to disagree.  
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: veu on October 24, 2005, 03:38:05 PM
You're right! There are more opinion about Marie Antoinette!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 24, 2005, 03:41:43 PM
It makes sense that the Queen was not well. She had all that heavy bleeding during her trial and while preparing for execution. Thanks for pointing that out!!!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: palatine on October 24, 2005, 03:58:29 PM
I wish more historians would leave questions open-ended, such as the speculation about Marie Antoinette and Fersen's relationship.  I think there is a modern tendency on the part of biographers to tell their readers what to think rather than to encourage their readers to think for themselves by presenting all the facts and letting them draw their own conclusions.   :(

I think some of her modern biographies would be improved if writers would present both sides of the question, rather than state simply that they had an affair.  I think Loomis does a good job in presenting the evidence before he draws a conclusion; I wish all her biographers did the same.

I suspect the new Marie Antoinette movie will be a horror.   There is no doubt in my mind that they will show Marie Antoinette having an affair with Fersen; it wouldn't be a movie without a love story, however inaccurate.  I don't know if you saw the movie they did a few years back about the Affair of the Necklace, but it was dreadful.  Unfortunately, when Hollywood meets history, history tends to go out the window.  Still, I think the new movie will have some benefit for Marie Antoinette's memory, since some who see it will want to learn more about her, and will turn to the books.

All of this is just my opinion and feel free to disagree.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 25, 2005, 09:18:02 AM
I totally agree with you, Palatine! They want to focus on M-A's relationship with Fersen, when her relationship with Louis was much more interesting. The real love story is there, because it was a love based not on passion but on sacrifice and commitment and staying together in spite of EVERYTHING.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 25, 2005, 02:21:43 PM
Thank you, Prince! I think I found that interpretation in an art book; I can't really remember for certain, but it does make sense.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 25, 2005, 02:24:05 PM
And no wonder MA couldn't bear to look at the painting again . . .  :-/
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 25, 2005, 02:33:40 PM
Exactly. Two of her precious children, shown in the portrait (one unseen), both dead...and this was a woman whose children were her life. She carried locks of their hair (the hair of Louis-Joseph and Sophie) around with her until her trial, I believe, when everything was taken from her.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: pers on October 26, 2005, 08:28:32 AM
I understood that whilst LeBrun was working on the painting, Madame Sophie died.  So initially the Dauphin held open the crib, showing the baby.  When the child died, LeBrun just painted the empty crib.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 26, 2005, 11:13:14 AM
Perhaps that is true, but I still think that Marie-Antoinette looks like she is pregnant in the painting.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 26, 2005, 11:30:04 AM
It could be both! A large group portrait took several months to finish, as appointments had to be made to do several sittings - for Marie Antoinette and for the children.

Vigée Lebrun says in her memoirs that she had just finished it in time for the Salon of 1788, so Sophie would have been dead by then wouldn't she?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 26, 2005, 11:43:08 AM
Yes,  Baby Mme. Sophie died in the summer of 1787.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Silja on October 31, 2005, 11:06:03 AM
Quote

 They want to focus on M-A's relationship with Fersen, when her relationship with Louis was much more interesting.


I very much agree.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 31, 2005, 11:33:23 AM
Thank you, Silja! Adultery is more sensational and acceptable to many people than is a difficult marriage where the couple had to work out their problems.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Silja on October 31, 2005, 01:55:47 PM
Quote
Thank you, Silja! Adultery is more sensational and acceptable to many people than is a difficult marriage where the couple had to work out their problems.


Absolutely! Especially in this case, where Louis XVI is generally considered a very weak and unattractive husband. But he was more interesting and certainly more intelligent than is commonly assumed.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 31, 2005, 02:25:24 PM
Yes!! He was extremely intelligent and well-read in philosophy, history and literature. He enjoyed the works of Shakespeare and Erasmus (he had a portrait of the latter in his private library).  He was conversant in several languages. His specialty was geography and he was a gifted amateur cartographer. He was also quite athletic, and was the one of the tallest men in Versailles, and one of the most muscular, due to his hobby as locksmith. He went horseback riding everyday and hunting several times a week. He did not start to put on weight until his thirties and was slender as a youth.

He was not as unattractive as is usually supposed but he had problems with social skills. He was near-sighted and painfully shy, which often came across as diffidence and abruptness. He was a man of few words, and did not care about fancy clothes or dancing. He detested cards, which he thought were a waste of time. He loved his people and was a dedicated monarch.

Much has been written about his difficulties consummating his marriage, and it is generally supposed he had a defect which was eventually remedied by an operation. This is not a proven historical fact, however. Bernard Fay and Vincent Cronin emphasize the fact that Louis went hunting everyday during the period the alleged operation took place, which would have been impossible considering the delicate nature of the procedure. Although the Austrian ambassador Count Mercy-Argenteau and Emperor Joseph blamed Louis for the lack of an heir, Fay goes so far to say that Marie-Antoinette may have had a difficulty, based on the reports of the Spanish ambassador, who also had spies in the royal bedchamber. Whatever the problem was with their intimate  spousal relations, Louis and Antoinette overcame it and they had four children, the first being born when the queen was 22years (she was 14 when married.)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 31, 2005, 05:09:38 PM
I believe that phimosis (sp?) is the generally accepted reason for the lack of children for so long, but as you rightly point out Elena Maria, the theory is just that - a theory.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on October 31, 2005, 09:37:04 PM
Yes, Prince, it is just a theory. There is no medical documentation of it, even when Louis had a complete medical examination, there is no mention of the phimosis at all. There are vague references to "surgery" in some family letters and  M-A's brother Joseph wrote a graphic letter to brother Leopold which was probably more for Leopold's amusement at Louis' expense. As you say, everything here is in the realm of theory.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: bell_the_cat on November 01, 2005, 12:55:46 AM
Quote
Yes, Prince, it is just a theory. There is no medical documentation of it, even when Louis had a complete medical examination, there is no mention of the phimosis at all. There are vague references to "surgery" in some family letters and  M-A's brother Joseph wrote a graphic letter to brother Leopold which was probably more for Leopold's amusement at Louis' expense. As you say, everything here is in the realm of theory.


Even when they started having children she didn't produce many, compared to her sister Maria Carolina, for example. In those days four wasn't really enough to ensure that there would be an heir, sadly.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on November 01, 2005, 08:14:54 AM
Very true, which is why Louis' brother Provence never gave up hope. Also, Antoinette is said to have had several miscarriages on and off during her married life. She suffered some hair loss while in her early thirties which may have been connected to them. Someone on another thread pointed out that it is now speculated that towards the end of her life she may have had either uterine or ovarian cancer, having many of the physical manifestations. She may have died from cancer if the guillotine had not already killed her.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: bell_the_cat on November 01, 2005, 10:52:04 AM
Quote
Very true, which is why Louis' brother Provence never gave up hope. Also, Antoinette is said to have had several miscarriages on and off during her married life. She suffered some hair loss while in her early thirties which may have been connected to them. Someone on another thread pointed out that it is now speculated that towards the end of her life she may have had either uterine or ovarian cancer, having many of the physical manifestations. She may have died from cancer if the guillotine had not already killed her.


Not a pleasant choice. :-/

However tomorrow we can celebrate her 250th birthday!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on November 01, 2005, 11:11:57 AM
That's right!! Thanks for the reminder!! All Souls day Nov 2 is Marie-Antoinette's birthday!!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: bell_the_cat on November 01, 2005, 11:23:12 AM
Quote
That's right!! Thanks for the reminder!! All Souls day Nov 2 is Marie-Antoinette's birthday!!


Today is the 250th anniversary of the Lisbon earthquake, as Grand Duke reminded us.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Silja on November 01, 2005, 12:00:54 PM
Quote
Yes!! He was extremely intelligent and well-read in philosophy, history and literature. He enjoyed the works of Shakespeare and Erasmus (he had a portrait of the latter in his private library).  He was conversant in several languages. His specialty was geography and he was a gifted amateur cartographer. He was also quite athletic, and was the one of the tallest men in Versailles, and one of the most muscular, due to his hobby as locksmith. He went horseback riding everyday and hunting several times a week. He did not start to put on weight until his thirties and was slender as a youth.

 


You are quite right. I hadn't known about the portrait of Erasmus, which is quite interesting.
I have indeed always been impressed by his cartographing skills, which required profound mathematical knowledge.




Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on November 01, 2005, 12:14:59 PM
Well...I think that Marie Antoinette and Han Von Fersen were lovers. Not the type we think of today but more romantic and courtly love. The letters that exchanged suggested a doomed love that greatly appeal to romantics. In fact, Von Fersen tend to appeal more towards the suffering heroine than the silly creature in the Trianon. As for Louis XVI, he was a better husband than all his brothers and Marie Antoinette came to appreciate him more as a husband later on. In the begining though she tend to prefer the handsome and elegant brother-in-law Artois.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on November 01, 2005, 01:17:01 PM
 Eric, Marie-Antoinette and Count Axel von Fersen may perhaps have had a courtly romantic love along the lines of the old code of chivalry, one of yearning balanced by restraint, desperate and unconsummated. Axel was known to have at least one mistress in Paris and was also rumored to be bisexual. I do not know for certain what the queen felt for him, but he definitely had her on a pedestal and worshipped her, as did many young men, in a chivalrous way. Fersen was also friends with Louis, whom he respected. Fersen would have done anything to save the Royal Family, and was acting not only from sentiment but on behalf of his master the King of Sweden, who also wanted to help them and tried before he himself was assassinated.

Marie-Antoinette enjoyed the company of the handsome Artois, her brother-in-law, because he was a good dancer and cardplayer and enjoyed remodeling houses and gardens (his Bagatelle was Artois' version of Trianon.) But the queen wrote that of the three brothers,  that she had married the best one, "whom God chose" for her.

As for Trianon, it has been described as a place of decadence, but contemporaries described it as small and simple, a mere country house, compared to other royal retreats.  The Queen needed a place to get away and be with her children, for at Versailles they were constantly in the public eye. Trianon was extremely modest compared to the Empress Josephine's Malmaison and much less expensive to the French people. Trianon was not just for play; it was a working farm which helped to feed the enormous royal household and agricultural experiments were done there to help improve improve French methods of farming. There were orchards and a working dairy. Marie-Antoinette had read the works of Rousseau and liked the idea of living close to nature and the land. Trianon was her way of achieving this.  Louis had his own farm at Rambouillet where he raised sheep and also had a dairy.  It had become fashionable for the nobility to invest in a farm or business for income so as not to be completely dependent upon taxes. Mme Elisabeth also had a farm and dairy and donated all the milk to poor children.

People forget that Marie-Antoinette tried to economize; she spent less money in her entire life than Mme. Pompadour did in a year. When she wore simpler attire, she was criticized for trying to put the French silk merchants out of business.

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on November 01, 2005, 08:49:46 PM
Yes that is why I think their love was more emotional than physical. Count Von Fersen tried to save the Queen and her family and would gladly gave his life if the Queen could be saved. That is what I call romantic love. Not the Diana/Hewitt type of a quick roll in the hay...I also think that is why it is moving and a beautiful but sad chapter in the life of the tragic queen.

The purchase of Trianon and Rambouillet was also counted as an extravgence. Just the dairy and the serves china (the notorious beast cups !) cost a fortune.
Another thing was the gambling, which the queen was guilty of. I guess she was the target of negative propaganda once she became queen. Fanned on by her enemies Provence and Orleans...
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on November 02, 2005, 08:26:41 AM
Yes, people now do not understand about a love that is just spiritual and emotional.

Yes, the dairies were considered an extravagance but that was part of the propaganda against the queen. Everything she did was used against her and she became the symbol of extravagance which was unfair when people like Orleans and Mme. de Genlis and Louis' brothers were spending much more money than she was spending. No one ever remembers the extensive charities she presided over, the home for single mothers she started at Versailles, the poor families she supported out of her own pocket, her generosity in responding to any need or petition which came before her.

Her gambling was out of control when she was young but she gave it up when Louis asked her to do so. She learned to gamble from her parents; they played for much higher stakes in Austrian court. Most of the nobility gambled; it was a way of making a living for some. Marie-Antoinette was not alone in this bad habit. After she finally became a mother she calmed down and focused on her family. Most of her frivolity happened when she was a teenager and in her early twenties and compared to how the youth now is, it was nothing.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on November 02, 2005, 09:43:58 AM
I truly believe she was brought down by the propaganda spread out by Provence and Orleans who wanted to weaken the monarchy. For a long time, she was childless, so the gambling, expensive dresses and parties were used to illustrate how instead of this she should be a mother. Also the fact that she was a foreigner also played into the hands of her enemies, who spread lies that she was a spy for Austria (some people still believe this silly thing as fact in France even today !).  Also her carelessness in the diamond necklace affair was also used against her...If only she was as ambitious and cunning as her sister , Maria Carolina, she may have kept her head.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on November 02, 2005, 02:26:12 PM
The whole theory of Marie-Antoinette gambling, dancing and buying dresses between the ages of 14 and 22 in order to vent her sexual frusrations and fill her empty childless life was put forward by Stefan Zweig, a disciple of Freud. I just wonder how this accounts for all the people who had fulfilled love lives and several children but who were doing the same things as M-A? IMO, she was just very young, high-spirited and liked to "party."

As for the Diamond Necklace scandal, Marie-Antoinette was completely innocent. She thought the necklace was vulgar, especially since it had originally been designed for Mme du Barry. She and Louis insisted on an open trial because they felt they had nothing to hide, but it may have been better if they had settled it out of court. But they were both too honest.....
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on November 02, 2005, 02:47:37 PM
The Diamond Necklace affair was a very mired business, but Marie Antoinette was totally innocent, as Elena Maria has attested . . .
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on November 02, 2005, 09:26:48 PM
Nobody said the Queen was guilty here. However by the time the scandal broke, her repuatationn had been so marred by her enemies that the population belived anything bad about her is possible. It was a vindication of her enemies over the Queen. She foolishly burnt the note, which led people to suspect she has something to hide (which is as we now know not the case at all). Also Marie Antoinette should have cover this up instead of going into public trial, where this act actually put the Royal family on trial. Had she knew what the people's view of her, she might have consented to let the cardinal pay for the necklace and hushed up the incident. Napoleon once said the affair of the diamond necklace was the final nail in the coffin for the Bourbons, and it was true. The Queen could have avoided the scandal, but didn't.  
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on November 03, 2005, 06:56:00 AM
Quote
Nobody said the Queen was guilty here.  


I know, I was just making a point.
:)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on November 03, 2005, 08:37:48 PM
Yes...and there are times she could have made wiser decicions but didn't.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on November 04, 2005, 06:39:16 AM
I think it was more a question of lack of prudence in some matters.... In the Diamond Necklace scandal, however, there was no way of predicting the outcome, and the King and Queen made the best decision under the circumstances, IMO.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on November 04, 2005, 12:58:23 PM
No...I don't think so. They were guilty in seperating themselves from the people for such a long time, which Provence and Orleans (especially) were close to the population and use this to spread anti-royal propagranda. The Queen who was too busy pratcing a play did not know her popularity is on an all time low. "Madame deficit", "The Austrian Woman" and "the Lesbian Queen"...all of these libels did their work. She was deemed guilty even before the trial...
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on November 04, 2005, 01:00:05 PM
The Lesbian accusations were always a step too far IMO . . . utterly ridiculous.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on November 04, 2005, 01:07:01 PM
It was...although Marie Antoinette was quite close with her friends. Once her brother-in-law, Comte de Artois came surprisedly into a room and saw the Queen and one of her ladies sharing tears. He excused himself at once. But the rumour had started. Similiar rumour also claimed the MA's sister Maria Carolina was also a lesbian...
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on November 04, 2005, 01:33:59 PM
'Sharing tears'? Forgive me if I'm ignorant, but what does that mean? Just crying together?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on November 04, 2005, 02:07:44 PM
Quote
No...I don't think so. They were guilty in seperating themselves from the people for such a long time, which Provence and Orleans (especially) were close to the population and use this to spread anti-royal propagranda. The Queen who was too busy pratcing a play did not know her popularity is on an all time low. "Madame deficit", "The Austrian Woman" and "the Lesbian Queen"...all of these libels did their work. She was deemed guilty even before the trial...



All terrible libels spread by Orleans and Provence in their struggle for the crown. Louis and Antoinette were as close to the people (because of their charitable works and duties as monarchs) as Orleans ( only because he lived in Paris at the Palais Royale.) The palace of Versailles was open to the public. Men had to wear a sword but those could be rented at the gate. The Royal family often dined in public. I really do not understand how Provence could have been closer to the people than Louis, who often mingled with the peasants and talked to the workingmen.
The lesbian rumor started along with the rumor of Louis' impotence. Antoinette was not known to be having affairs with any men, so they (some people) assumed she was having affairs with her ladies. It was done deliberately to destroy her image in the eyes of the French.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on November 04, 2005, 02:12:29 PM
Quote
It was...although Marie Antoinette was quite close with her friends. Once her brother-in-law, Comte de Artois came surprisedly into a room and saw the Queen and one of her ladies sharing tears. He excused himself at once. But the rumour had started. Similiar rumour also claimed the MA's sister Maria Carolina was also a lesbian...



Since when is weeping on a friend's shoulder indicative of lesbianism? Antoinette was loving and sentimental, something which many jaded courtiers did not understand and so twisted it.

I NEVER heard  rumors about Maria Carolina being a lesbian. A freemason, yes.  However, she was extremely busy with her 11 children, you know.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on November 04, 2005, 10:16:37 PM
Yes...Maria Carolina was accused of having an affair with Lady Hamiliton in some accounts. I think they were just bosom friends. Although the affection went beyond people's conception of "friendship" in those days, where a glance, a smile a closing touching of bodies are reported as gossip. I also feel people used these evil rumours as propaganda for their agenda.

No...MA was "not" close to the people. Remember when she had to wait on her sister-in-law who was giving birth. She was jeered by the fish wives there for her unfertility due to her decedent lifestyle. A claer indication of the people's dissapooval of her conduct. Yet she did not reform herself until much later.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on November 05, 2005, 02:19:38 PM
Quote
Yes...Maria Carolina was accused of having an affair with Lady Hamiliton in some accounts. I think they were just bosom friends. Although the affection went beyond people's conception of "friendship" in those days, where a glance, a smile a closing touching of bodies are reported as gossip. I also feel people used these evil rumours as propaganda for their agenda.

No...MA was "not" close to the people. Remember when she had to wait on her sister-in-law who was giving birth. She was jeered by the fish wives there for her unfertility due to her decedent lifestyle. A claer indication of the people's dissapooval of her conduct. Yet she did not reform herself until much later.


Yes, Eric, I agree that people used evil rumors as propaganda.  That someone would concoct such a rumor about Maria-Carolina and Lady Hamilton is so far-fetched, especially when Emma Hamilton was totally obsessed with Lord Nelson at the time.

Well, we will have to agree to disagree about how close to the people Marie-Antoinette was or wasn't. Yes, I recall when the fishwives mocked her at the birth of the Duc d'Angouleme. It shows that the common people were allowed to roam the palace and say whatever they wanted to the Queen with impunity.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on November 05, 2005, 02:27:26 PM
With regard to extravagance, I'm sure I read somewhere that compared to Mesdames Tantes, Marie Antoinette's expenditure was quite tame! :o
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on November 05, 2005, 03:31:15 PM
Quote
With regard to extravagance, I'm sure I read somewhere that compared to Mesdames Tantes, Marie Antoinette's expenditure was quite tame! :o


Yes, and in comparison to the Louis' brothers, Provence and Artois, her expenditures were also tame. And Madame Pompadour spent more money on one year than than Maroe-Antoinette did in her entire life. So did Napoleon's Josephine....
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on November 05, 2005, 05:40:56 PM
Louis and MA were never on good terms with the Provences, were they?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on November 05, 2005, 06:36:37 PM
No, but they tried to make the best of it. Madame, as the Comtesse de Provence (Marie-Josephine of Sardinia) was called, had originally been intended to be the wife of Louis XVI when he was Dauphin. She had always been told that she would be the Queen of France someday. Because of the intrigues of La Pompadour, she was replaced by Antoinette, and so married the younger brother Provence. She was terribly jealous of Marie-Antoinette, especially when the latter had children (poor Marie-Josephine suffered many miscarriages, no live offspring, very sad). Marie-Josephine may herself have been a lesbian, and yet she is one of the people who probably spread so many rumors about her sister-in-law.

Provence, of course, hated that Louis became King when he thought himself to be better qualified. Both couples supped together every evening, along with the Artois family, because it saved money to eat en famille.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on November 05, 2005, 07:41:29 PM
I think MA is just unfortunate when the system was at such a low point. Couple with that, she was not one that can handle a situation (like her famous mother and sister Maria Carolina). Had she been wife of a strong man in peace times, her life would have been much happier.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: veu on November 10, 2005, 03:36:24 PM
Any new pic????
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Shvibzik on December 09, 2005, 10:03:55 AM
Quote
Not a very beautiful woman, IMO . . .

It's a bit hard to tell, since some paintings depict her as a very pretty woman and others make her look really ugly.

I know this is an old thread, but it's very interesting.  I've always really like the Marie Antoinette story, although I've never really gotten to get my hands on any books.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on December 09, 2005, 11:41:36 AM
I think Marie Antoinette and Mary , Queen of Scots will continue to be all time favourite tragic heroines... :'(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: veu on December 17, 2005, 01:00:26 PM
Quote
I think Marie Antoinette and Mary , Queen of Scots will continue to be all time favourite tragic heroines... :'(


We also!!!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Anastasia_R on December 17, 2005, 09:31:32 PM
Quote
Thank you for these magnificent pictures of the beautiful queen.  I love the Lady in Red!! I am so upset that Kirsten Dunst is going to play Marie-Antoinette in the new Sophia Coppola movie. Kirsten is pretty but does not have the ethereal quality that Marie-Antoinette had, as seen in these portraits and testified by contemporaries, who spoke of her "heavenly eyes." (Kate Winslet would have been a better choice, IMO.)

You're kidding me!Getting a tad off topic here,but although Kirsten is a wonderful actress,I do NOT think that she is fit to play Marie Antoinette.I find this a tad mad.
D'oh!Sorry,I'm getting my names mixed up here. ;D\
Hmm just watched the trailer.When I saw the first pic of Kirsten I didn't think she could pull it off but now that I saw the trailer she actually looks promising.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on December 18, 2005, 12:22:47 PM
I thought the same, AnastasiaR, about Kirsten; I don't think she has enough range as an actress to be MarieAntoinette in her totality. But I saw the pictures from the film and she looks the part of the young M-A.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on December 18, 2005, 03:56:14 PM
I just saw the trailer of the new movie and I revise my previous statement. Sorry, it looks more to me like a film about Mme du Barry than about Marie-Antoinette.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Silja on December 31, 2005, 12:28:28 PM
I think Ute Lemper looks quite convincing as Marie Antoinette in L'Autrichienne.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: elena_maria_vidal on December 31, 2005, 12:43:32 PM
Do you have a link to that? Never mind, I'll find it on the internet.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: palimpsest on January 08, 2006, 05:28:45 PM
(http://img327.imageshack.us/img327/3286/77289223ev.jpg)

Marie Antoinette's oak tree being pulled down to the ground in the gardens of Louis XIV's palace in Versailles, west of Paris, Wednesday, Feb. 9, 2005. The tree, know as Marie-Antoinette's oak tree, was planted in 1681 and died during the heatwave in France in Aug. 2003. Marie-Antoinette, wife of France's King Louis XIV, died in 1793 and it is said she liked to sit under the tree's shade. (AP Photo/Michel Euler)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on February 08, 2006, 01:32:04 PM
(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/kedvesem/marie19.jpg)


(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/kedvesem/marie69.jpg)

(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/kedvesem/marie50a.jpg)

(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/kedvesem/marie13.jpg)

(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/kedvesem/marie127.jpg)

(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/kedvesem/marie59.jpg)

(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/kedvesem/marie128.jpg)

(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/kedvesem/marie70.jpg)

(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/kedvesem/marie59.jpg)

(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/kedvesem/marie87.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on February 08, 2006, 01:46:35 PM
(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/kedvesem/marie151.jpg)

(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/kedvesem/marie113c.jpg)

(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/kedvesem/marie79.jpg)

(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/kedvesem/marie138.jpg)

(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/kedvesem/marie14.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 06, 2006, 05:58:23 PM
  I know this topic might seem very strange!!!!! :o
However I read in Madame Campam`s memoirs that Marie Antoinette was at the time of the Tuileries very sensitive to "signs", she mentiones that once she was with the queen and MA told her that while she was looking at herself in the mirror she saw herself without head!  :o

  Now I thought it was interesting because it proves that people while passing through hard moments always try to find answers, to find what lies beneath.

On the other hand Catherine of Medicis looked for Michel de Notre Dame (Nostradamus) for answers and futur prediction.
 
     I know each one of us have there own opinion, some see it has something foolish, but than again this is a somehow unknown side of Marie Antoinette, she was at the end superstitious.
 
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 06, 2006, 06:08:57 PM
Madame Campan mentiones other anecdotes which I can`t recall right now! Maybe you guys know a little more about it! :P
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: ilyala on March 07, 2006, 03:06:57 AM
i read somewhere that marie antoinette's first apartment in versailles had the story of sodoma and gomora painted on it... i know this isn't exactly a premonition, but it's strange nevertheless (it's strange that someone would paint that on a room's wall and it's strange that she lived in that)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 07, 2006, 03:43:03 AM
There also was this story of Antoinette having 4 candels burning on a table next to her bed. It was by the time the dauphin Joseph was dying, I think. One by one, the candels were unexplicably put out. And the queen said if the last one also was, she would take it as a bad omen. It was.

I read more than once that Marie-Antoinette used to have people doing cards for her. She also met the famous Saint-Germain count, who gave her very alarming predictions.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: pers on March 07, 2006, 05:23:33 AM
I have the memoirs of Mme Campan, and definitely remember the candles going out one by one on her dressingtable.  However I do not recall the mentioning of her looking in a mirror at the Tuileries and not seeing her head/a severed head.  Maybe Sissi can direct us to that chapter in the book?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 07, 2006, 08:21:38 AM
I will try to find the chapter dear Pers! ;D

  She also mentiones that Marei Antoinette had lost her wedding ring, it appears that she left on the sink while she was washing her hands and supposely a priest gave it back after a long period of time I believe, and supposely a awoman had put a spell on the ring so she could not have children!  ::)

 
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 07, 2006, 08:28:40 AM
Yes, I remember this story too. She only find her ring back after having her first child, I think.

Anyway, these were times fond of superstitions. Why would Marie-Antoinette be less emotional than the others ? She used to write "Mais moi je vous porte à tous malheur" (But I bring to all of you misortune). Poor sweetheart !  :-* :-* :-*
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 07, 2006, 08:35:01 AM
Quote
i read somewhere that marie antoinette's first apartment in versailles had the story of sodoma and gomora painted on it... i know this isn't exactly a premonition, but it's strange nevertheless (it's strange that someone would paint that on a room's wall and it's strange that she lived in that)


I didn`t know that but yes it is strange!!! Stephan Zweig mentions that the tapestry located in the reception pavillion when she was to be turned in  to the french, was regarded by many as a lack of tact and a bad omen could any of you guys refresh my memory and tell me what was the tapestry about!!!


   The fact tha she was born on November 2 was also regarded as a bad omen since she was born the day of the dead, and that day there was an earthquake in Lisboa and it destroyed almos the entire city! the Queen and king of portugal were her godparents.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 07, 2006, 08:49:10 AM
And she told Campan about her father's death. She said that, about to get away, already in the coach, he called her and pressed her in his arms, desperately. She never saw him again...

Her mother is reported to have cried her name, too, just before she died.

Goethe saw and commented the tapestries you mention, dear Sissi. He wrote there were Jason, Medea and Creuse, thus, horrible examples of marriage.

(http://www.point-contrepoint.com/enseignement/varietes/img/medee.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 07, 2006, 08:59:51 AM
Thank you coquelicot!!!! yes I remember that young Goethe was surprised and thought that it was very umproper to have them there, when the Dauphine and future bride was expected!!!!

  When Maria Theresa died she called out the name of all her children, when you say she cried out you mean she broke in tears is that it??
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: bell_the_cat on March 07, 2006, 09:05:03 AM
Quote

I didn`t know that but yes it is strange!!! Stephan Zweig mentions that the tapestry located in the reception pavillion when she was to be turned in  to the french, was regarded by many as a lack of tact and a bad omen could any of you guys refresh my memory and tell me what was the tapestry about!!!


    The fact tha she was born on November 2 was also regarded as a bad omen since she was born the day of the dead, and that day there was an earthquake in Lisboa and it destroyed almos the entire city! the Queen and king of portugal were her godparents.


The earthquake was on November 1 - still I suppose it was an amazing coincidence!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 07, 2006, 09:27:33 AM
Really I have always thought that it was on the second since I have always known that people regarded it as a bad omen for MA.
  Do you know if it was planned for the king and queen of portugal to be her godparents, or that tragedy might have influence Marie Therese?

 
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 07, 2006, 10:05:02 AM
Also when she was signing her mariage contract she made a quite big ink stinch.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 07, 2006, 10:10:47 AM
Quote
When Maria Theresa died she called out the name of all her children, when you say she cried out you mean she broke in tears is that it??


That's it, Sissi ! She called out the names of all her children and, come to Antoinette's, she cried. But she knew for long horrible things was going to happen to her daughter. She often wrote to Mercy "ma fille court à sa perte" (my daughter runs to ruin).

About this Saint Germain count, again... I'm not sure it's true, for I just read this on the net : he asked to meet Marie-Antoinette, told her about her future, we can imagine in a soft way... and is reported to have had a vision of Marie Stuart. Another tragically beheaded queen...  :-[
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 07, 2006, 10:14:16 AM
Quote
Also when she was signing her mariage contract she made a quite big ink stinch


Indeed, she did ! You can see a pic of it in Fraser's book. Her signature is very childish, we see she wasn't familiar yet with writing. "J" in Josepha and Johanna are terrible ! So, at the end, she droped an ink flower...  ;)

Less poetically, people considered it a bad omen too.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 07, 2006, 11:44:56 AM
A small biography of the Count Saint Germain, I found ont the net!

(1690? - 1784?)

A mysterious figure whose dates of birth and death are in some dispute, with more esoteric students of history believing that he is somehow deathless. He may have been the son of Racoczi II, a ruler of Transylvania, which intimates even more interesting speculations about his immortality. A contemporary, Jean-Philippe Rameau, claimed to have met him in 1710 under a different name (as a Marquis) and said he seemed to be in his 40s, which would set his birth around 1670, and would mean that he was 114 years old at his putative death.

Saint-Germain became known in the 1750s as an associate of Louis XV and his mistress who spent soirees with the Comte engaged in esoteric, artistic and political conversation. He was also known as an alchemist and lapidary expert -- supposedly able to increase the size of gems and possessed of the age-old, much-ballyhooed secret of transmuting base metals into gold. All this makes him seem to us to be something of a confidence-trickster and master of illusion, which, to be frank, has always been a large part of "magic" in the public eye, and a part practiced expertly by every successful magus we know of -- including Edward Kelly, Cagliostro, Mathers, and of course Aleister Crowley.

Saint-Germain's closeness to the King naturally bought him the envy of other courtiers and ministers who ceaselessly plotted against him, and eventually he had to flee to England until the "heat" died down. (It was in England that he may have met a kindred spirit, Cagliostro, or the latter may have met him.) He was not to return to France for over a decade. From England, our Count went off to Russia and may have been involved in a conspiracy to place Catherine the Great on the throne.

He returned to France in 1774 to "smooze" with the yet-un-decapitated Louis XVI and his cake-loving mistress Marie Antoinette. He associated with the usual esoteric suspects and perhaps became engaged in revolutionary activity with them, or else spied on them on behalf of the King, or (most likely) played both sides of the gameboard, cashing in each way.

Saint-Germain eventually gained a reputation as an Adept based upon his innate knowledge and years of study and travel; thus he became known as a Rosicrucian in spirit if not in name, and readily associated with the Freemasons of Paris and elsewhere.

At the end of his life (?) Saint-Germain was living in Germany, again working at the court of a prince as a sort of in-house alchemist. It was here that he is believed to have died in 1784. Thus it is all the more unusual that he was reported present at a meeting of Parisian Freemasons in 1785, and reason is altogether strained to the breaking point to give any account to sightings of him in Vienna in 1821 (aged 130) and even later. Annie Besant claimed to have met him in 1896, perhaps in Vision, perhaps in some sort of eldritch, deathless flesh; and by this point, over two hundred years after his reputed birth, he was clearly a Master, either of the Ascended or some other variety.

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 08, 2006, 12:08:10 AM
(http://numeriphot.chez-alice.fr/images/saintgermain.jpg)

In a french bio I just found, they say that he is supposed to have predicted the future of monarchy to Marie-Antoinette, but that this was allegued.

I love this topic you opened, dear Sissi ! Good idea !

Must got to work now, but I'll be back later !  :-X
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: bell_the_cat on March 08, 2006, 12:51:05 AM
When the Grand Master of the Templars was burnt at the stake in 1314, his order having been destroyed by Philip the Fair, he is supposed to have cursed the dynasty of the Capetians. It was therefore supposed to be a fulfilment of the prophecy that the last prison of the Capet family was the headquarters of the Templars -the Temple.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 08, 2006, 05:21:42 AM
This is very interesting, dear Bell the Cat ! Jacques de Molay, last Grand Maître of the templars, while burning on orders of king Philippe IV, is reported to have shouted : "cursed, all cursed till the 13th generation of yours !"

Maurice Druon wrote a fascinating saga about this legend. It's true that king Philippe died this same year, and his sons, Louis, Philippe and Charles had very brief reigns. Then came 100 years war between France and England... A real curse, indeed !

This has nothing to do with our Burbons-Habsburg sovereigns, of course... but I once read a thesis pretending this was related. Louis Capet went to Varennes, they said, and, precisely, this territory was related to templars ! So, you have there a memory of this old curse against capetians ! Going to Varennes, they were lost in a templar bermuda triangle !

I guess that, a posteriori, it's easy to find good reasons...
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 08, 2006, 08:45:47 AM
Nostradamus also predicted the fall of the Bourbon and the revolution, (he also predicted the end of the Valois dinasty and the Bourbon rise to power).I will try to find a passage related to the Revolution adn the royal couple.
 
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 08, 2006, 09:03:32 AM
A couple of years ago I read that the Tuileries was names after a factury of "Tuiles" the owner was suposely killed by Catherine of Medicis who built afterwards the castle however it was said to be haunted. And supposely the "ghost" (I do not like the word but I don`t know how to call it) came out at particurlarly grave moment in the history of France.
 I had completely forgot about that until I found this link which is pretty interesting since it deals with Paris and its mystery. Sorry but it is in French

http://www.maison-hantee.com/files/paris/paris1.htm

  Basically what it says is that after they kill " the red man" he appeared to various courtisans, to Marie Antoinette who according to the text told Madame Campan about it, the comte d artois while walking in the garden saw a red light coming out of a window, in the morning his brother the king Louis XVIII told him that he was "visited" by the "red man"! After that he became quite ill.
 He appeared also to Napoleon before Waterloo and we know the result of that battle!
 
 It reminds me of the "white lady" of the Hapsburg!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 08, 2006, 09:27:47 AM
White lady of the Habsburgs ?  ??? Please tell us more, dear Sissi !  :P
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 08, 2006, 10:03:48 AM
The White Lady appears during the most tragic events of the Hapsburg, I read that her first appearance is dated in 1588 in the Yuste Monastery (Spain) where Charles V was retired, she appeared to marie Louise "Napoleon`s wife) as a child in her mother`s room and when she asked who the lady was her mother told her "that she was here to take her", people said that they saw her in the hallways during the agony of the Duc de Reichtadt and supposely Rudolf coach driver saw her in the Mayerling park!

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 08, 2006, 10:16:55 AM
Some people say that she appears nowaday in the palaces in Vienna! :o
 I heard the same story on the Trianon, I heard that there was a book I think written by some English ladies who "saw" a lady dressed in the fashion of the XVIII they thought it was Marie Antoinette! :o

   Well, in my case I have been in the Trianon lots of time and I had never seen anythingl like that , the only thing I can perceive is the essence of Marie Antoinette!

     
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 08, 2006, 10:20:33 AM
Suposely the white lady still appears nowaday in Shonnbrunn! :o

  I heard that there was a book written by two english ladies I believe in which they say they "saw" a lady dressed in the fashion of the XVIII in the gardens of Trianon, they thought it was MA! :o

  I have been there many times but I have never seen anything like that!!!  :P


Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 08, 2006, 11:40:02 AM
I've been there many times too... there indoubtably is something special in the air...
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 08, 2006, 11:48:52 AM
That is true you can feel the essence of Marie Antoinette! She really loved being there and the gardens too, its probably the place where she would have love to stay forever! She departed Trianon so quickly that she did not have time to "say goodbye" to it! I bet that she longed to return once in the Tuileries!

   it must have been an enchanting place while she was thre, full of flowers, peace, with only the sound of the cascade!!!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 08, 2006, 12:44:35 PM
Josephine de Beauharnais claimed she felt Marie-Antoinette's ghost in the Tuileries...
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: pers on March 08, 2006, 12:50:06 PM
Josephine actually intimated that the ghost of MA wanted to know what the heck is she (Josephine) doing in her (the Queen's) bed...  :o This must have been scary.  Thanks for posting the link to the mysteries of Paris.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 08, 2006, 01:16:01 PM
I am glad you liked it, I thought it was pretty interesting!!! So many things thta wwe do not know!!!
Did you read the second on part on the Pere Lachaise???
  It must have been terrifying for Josephine! Do you know if any other royal mentions something like that!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: pers on March 08, 2006, 01:29:20 PM
No, Sissi I do not.  I have read though that Empress Alexandra slept in the Queens bedroom in Versailles when they were there on a State visit.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 08, 2006, 01:32:17 PM
Yes she did some thought that it was a bad omen and a lack of tact, but in fact she was quite please with sleeping in her bed, i believe that she was also a fan of MA, not as Eugenie or Louis II but still she was an admirer I believe!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 08, 2006, 01:55:27 PM
Yes, they both were...  :) Josephine too, by the way... She felt an huge respect for Marie-Antoinette, and felt uncomfortable to sleep in her bed int the Tuileries.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: bell_the_cat on March 08, 2006, 02:08:56 PM
Quote
Yes she did some thought that it was a bad omen and a lack of tact, but in fact she was quite please with sleeping in her bed, i believe that she was also a fan of MA, not as Eugenie or Louis II but still she was an admirer I believe!


Alexandra also had a big picture of MA in her formal sitting room - there's a photo of it on this site. After the revolution it was thought to have been a bad omen, but before they probably thought nothing of it -  it was in keeping with the Louis Seize style of furnishing:

http://www.alexanderpalace.org/palace/afreception.html
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 08, 2006, 02:22:02 PM
Thanks bell the cat interesting Alexandra was a collector!
I heard that Nicolas red a lot on Louis XVI and after the fall he felt they had a common destiny.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: palatine on March 08, 2006, 02:58:23 PM
Liselotte, Duchess of Orleans, was told that the ghost of Francois I haunted a gallery at the palace of Fontainebleau, but she never saw it for herself.  She also recorded a ghost story about Henriette-Anne (Minette) of Orleans, her predecessor.

The story was told to Liselotte by the Dauphin, who once spent the night in the room where Minette died.  He said that in the wee hours of the morning, Minette’s ghost, dressed in an elegant ball gown, came floating into the room.  Alas, it was an awkward moment for an encounter with the spirit world: the Dauphin was sitting on a close stool.  He yelped in fright and embarrassment and leaped into bed, where he burrowed under the covers.  Minette’s ghost tactfully refrained from any further hauntings of the room.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 08, 2006, 03:29:58 PM
I guess paranormal things were common even for Royals!!! I can imagine the fright the Dauphin felt!!!! ;D

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 08, 2006, 03:44:45 PM
Guys I found the passage in Madame Campan`s memoirs where she talks about the "lost ring" it is in chapter X

"A few days after the Queen’s recovery from her confinement, the Cure of the Magdelaine de la City at Paris wrote to M. Campan and requested a private interview with him; it was to desire he would deliver into the hands of the Queen a little box containing her wedding ring, with this note written by the Cure: “I have received under the seal of confession the ring which I send to your Majesty; with an avowal that it was stolen from you in 1771, in order to be used in sorceries, to prevent your having any children.” On seeing her ring again the Queen said that she had in fact lost it about seven years before, while washing her hands, and that she had resolved to use no endeavour to discover the superstitious woman who had done her the injury."
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: pers on March 08, 2006, 04:28:31 PM
Merci Sissi, could you also find the passage about the severed head in the mirror, please?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 08, 2006, 04:45:37 PM
Dear pers I cannot find for now the related passage, I will keep on searching.
I have found the passage on the four candles


"One evening, about the end of May, she was sitting in her room, relating several remarkable occurrences of the day; four wax candles were placed upon her toilet-table; the first went out of itself; I relighted it; shortly afterwards the second, and then the third went out also; upon which the Queen, squeezing my hand in terror, said to me: "Misfortune makes us superstitious; if the fourth taper should go out like the rest, nothing can prevent my looking upon it as a sinister omen.” The fourth taper went out. It was remarked to the Queen that the four tapers had probably been run in the same mould, and that a defect in the wick had naturally occurred at the same point in each, since the candles had all gone out in the order in which they had been lighted."
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: pers on March 08, 2006, 05:05:50 PM
Initially when the Royal Family were imprisoned in the Temple, they lived in relative comfort.  
Food were supplied for the family and their attendants from the kitchen of the Grand Prior's Palace.  In early September 1792, the following report was made to the Commune:

Breakfast: 7 cups of coffee, 6 cups of chocolate, a coffee-pot of double-cream, a decanter of cold syrup, a decanter of barley water, 3 pats of butter, a plate of fruit, 6 rolls, 3 loaves, a sugar basin of powdered sugar, another loaf of sugar, a salt cellar.  The Royal Family did not eat everything and what remained was used by the three attendants, and the 12 domestics in the kitchen!

Dinner: 3 soups and 2 courses, consisting on non-fast days of 4 entrees, 2 dishes of roast meat, each containing 3 joints and 4 entremets; and on fast days 4 entrees, nearly all of meat and 4 or 5 entremets.  Dessert was normally a plate of pears, 3 compotes, 3 plates of fruit, 3 pats of butter, 2 kinds of sugar, a bottle of oil, a bottle of Champagne, a little decanter of Bordeaux, another of Malvoisie, another of Madeira, and 7 rolls.  What remained, the servants had along with a 2 lb loaf and 2 bottles vin ordinaire.

Supper:  3 soups and 3 courses.  On non-fast days it consisted of 2 entrees, 2 roasts and 4 or 5 entremets;  on fast days of 4 entrees not made of meat, 2 or 3 of meat, 2 roasts and 4 entremets.  Dessert was the same as for lunch except that coffee was added.

"The increase of the number of dishes at dinner and supper on fast days arises from the fact that Louis XVI fasts regularly on the days prescribed by the Church, while his companions do not.  He alone drinks wine; the others only drink water."

Maybe our French friends can explain all these courses to us lesser mortals.  Maybe we have an expert gourmet who knows all the intricacies of 18th century dining!!!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 09, 2006, 12:10:08 AM
Thank you, dear Pers ! I'm especially interested in sugar, because this was very expensive, and considered a luxuous matter. What to thing about all these food ? I don't know, and often wonder... especially for the queen, who didn't like meat that much. People found normal to have a huge series of plates and only touch some of them... ?

It's even stranger when we think that others usual products were not really supply. What about hygiena, so important for Marie-Antoinette ? Clothes and so on... On trial, she would speak of "mes hardes et celles de mes enfants" (my children's dirties old clothes and mine)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: pers on March 09, 2006, 02:24:17 AM
Initially they were supplied with everything except freedom.  The Assembly voted for the sum of 500,000 livres for their upkeep. (Anyone knows the current equation?)  A gold watch was supplied to MA at a cost of 900 livres.  The King's usual purveyors and tailors supplied him with clothes.  Thirty dressmakers worked feverishly to supply the women with all they required.  The perfume bill was 551 livres.  The furniture supplied came to 63,000 livres.  Madame Royale was amongst others supplied with a bath tub.  

Once all the things were supplied, the authorities took forever to pay the suppliers.  I think this is where the wheels came off, and nothing further was supplied.  So at least one can assume that initially there was no shortage except for liberty.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: ilyala on March 09, 2006, 02:55:15 AM
Quote
Thanks bell the cat interesting Alexandra was a collector!
 I heard that Nicolas red a lot on Louis XVI and after the fall he felt they had a common destiny.



in a simmilar way louis and antoinette had studied the life of charles 1st of england...
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 09, 2006, 06:11:55 AM
It's really interesting, Pers ! However, this place was so awful, so sad, so dark and so wet... How could they manage to have suitable furniture ? Madame Royale is reported to have asked for special powder against insects.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 09, 2006, 06:13:37 AM
Yes, Louis is reported to have been fascinated with this beheaded king of England... frightening, really...
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: pers on March 09, 2006, 08:18:11 AM
As indicated above, brand new furniture was supplied at considerable cost.  Maybe the insects have inhabited the Temple long before the Royal Family moved there...  You're right it probably was a very dreary place, as most of the windows had screens pointing upwards on the outside, if one looks at the drawings.  I once visited the Chateau de Vincennes, and I suspect that the Temple was somewhat similar?  Where are our Parisian friends...  :)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 09, 2006, 10:00:53 AM
If this was the place... well... without me...  :o

(http://www.zetetique.ldh.org/images/histoire/naund4.gif)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 09, 2006, 04:48:43 PM
Interesting!!! Very interesting!!! :o
   What about Marie Antoinette??? I know she did not read a lot while in power, but did she ever made a comment on her predecesors?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Kimberly on March 11, 2006, 04:53:40 AM
Its Liam's fault...he suggested I read the biography of Marie Antoinette by Antonia Fraser and I am now captivated by this lady. The question may seem frivolous but I don't mean it to be but what is with the hair? Looking at the beautiful portraits in the book, they have tall coiffures and the colouring is white or grey. So my questions are...is this powder or did they wear wigs? Why, I wonder did they cover their own natural colouring? Did the ladies shave their own hair to get a "better fit? Thanks in anticipation..Kim
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on March 11, 2006, 06:22:25 AM
Guilty as charged.  ;D

CountessKate is the lady to ask, I'm sure she'll know. I mentioned on another thread that Louis XV's father-in-law seemed to have grey hair in a portrait when he was 15! CountessKate said he was probably wearing grey powder in his hair, the fashion of the time. So maybe that's what MA etc did.  ???
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: pers on March 11, 2006, 06:32:21 AM
As far as I know, it was their own natural hair.  Apparently a kind of framework was used and the hair was arranged over that.  It was then powdered.  That was the fashion, and you know how fashion is!

See Mme Campan, Chapter V:
"Fashion continued its fluctuating progress;  and head-dresses, with their superstructures of gauze, flowers and feathers, became so lofty that the women could not find carriages high enough to admit them;  and they were often seen either stooping, or holding their heads out of the windows.  Others knelt down in order to manage these elevated objects of ridicule with less danger...  The King's brothers also came very generally to pay their respects to her Majesty while her hair was being dressed.  In the earlier years of the reign the first part of the dressing was performed in the bedchamber and according to the laws of etiquette;  that is to say, the lady of honour put on the chemise and poured out the water for the hands, the tirewoman put on the skirt of the gown or full dress, adjusted the handkerchief, and tied on the necklace.  But when the young Queen became more seriously devoted to fashion, and the head-dress attained so extravagant a height that it became necessary to put on the chemise from below,- when, in short, she determined to have her milliner, Mademoiselle Bertin, with her whilst she was dressing, whom the ladies would have refused to admit to share in the honour of attending on the Queen, the dressing in the bedchamber was discontinued, and the Queen, leaving her toilet, withdrew into her closet to dress."

I hope this gives you some information!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Kimberly on March 11, 2006, 07:29:29 AM
Thanks Pers. What I find quite eyebrow raising is that even young tots appeared to have powdered grey hair. I wonder if there was also an element of "anti head-louse" treatment going on here.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eddie_uk on March 11, 2006, 08:32:57 AM
Quote
Its Liam's fault...he suggested I read the biography of Marie Antoinette by Antonia Fraser and I am now captivated by this lady.


lol, welcome to the club Kimberly!!  :-* Marie Antoinette is indeed captivating!!!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Ortino on March 11, 2006, 12:07:12 PM
Quote
Its Liam's fault...he suggested I read the biography of Marie Antoinette by Antonia Fraser and I am now captivated by this lady. The question may seem frivolous but I don't mean it to be but what is with the hair? Looking at the beautiful portraits in the book, they have tall coiffures and the colouring is white or grey. So my questions are...is this powder or did they wear wigs? Why, I wonder did they cover their own natural colouring? Did the ladies shave their own hair to get a "better fit? Thanks in anticipation..Kim


I've just recently finished reading Antonia Fraser's biography of Marie Antoinette and I must say it is brilliant! Yes, it was their real hair, but it was of course powdered and usually augmented with pads, extensions, and pomade made from apples, lard, and floral oils. It was then supplemented with fabric, feathers, flowers and jewelry. Sometimes more interesting things were added, like objects to commerate certain events, such as military battles and even the flying of the hot air balloon. How 18th century French women ever managed to keep their heads up, let alone walk with such tall and elaborate headdresses, is something I will never understand.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on March 11, 2006, 01:13:05 PM
Was this unique to France, or was it practiced across the channel too? I've always thought George III's daughters looked like they were wearing wigs.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 11, 2006, 01:34:07 PM
Some of these ladies wore portraits of their dogs in their poufs. I want one !  ;D
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Ortino on March 11, 2006, 01:43:08 PM
Quote
Was this unique to France, or was it practiced across the channel too? I've always thought George III's daughters looked like they were wearing wigs.


It seems that it was an extensive practice in European courts (French, English, Austrian etc.), but, as expected, the French style was far more formal and elaborate. As the leaders of fashion, this doesn't surprise me.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: CountessKate on March 11, 2006, 01:51:29 PM
Powdering one's hair began in France in the late 1600s amongst actors of comedies (i.e. not in serious plays) as a comedic device - apparently it was thought to make them funnier.  By the early 1700s it was widespread as a fashion accessory, first in France and then throughout Europe - it was not really taken up in England until the 1730s.  A lot of early English portraits show men and women with unpowdered hair.  Lady Mary Wortley Montagu noted it in Vienna in 1716 and wrote that the ladies at court had hair like white wool, and with their red faces (from the heavy rouge), it gave them the appearance of flayed sheep.  However, fashion overcame English reluctance and hair was fashionably powdered there, too.  

The huge hairstyles of the early 1700s and the 1770s were achieved by the wearers' own hair (women, that is; except in the case of illness, only men wore wigs), with false hair and pads to gain height (and to provide some structure for the feathers and jewels they put in).  George III's daughters would have been wearing this sort of structure in Gainsborough's portrait for example - their own long hair pulled over pads, with perhaps some false hair to eke out any deficiencies.  The powder was an imense help in providing a sort of cloaking veil over imperfections in the structure.

There is no indication that the use of powder arose from any sanitary measures.  Indeed, with the universal use of greasy pomades to keep the elaborate hairstyles in place, hair could be a breeding-ground for all sorts of unpleasant visitors, if women didn't wash their hair frequently.  A lady in Boston in the 1770s use gum made from gum arabic, pomatum, tallow or hog's grease - the cheaper version of what Marie Antoinette and her courtiers would have worn on their hair.

Hair powder went out of fashion with the move to less rigid styles of clothing and hair, accelerated by French Revolution, and in England, the heavy tax on luxury items which helped to pay for the wars against France, made the newer fashions more attractive.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Kimberly on March 11, 2006, 02:21:05 PM
Thanks Countess Kate. I have seen some really peculiar "concoctions"  with stuffed birds, fruit and even galleons...egad, certainly beats extensions ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: palatine on March 11, 2006, 02:43:53 PM
Marie Antoinette's hairdresser, Monsieur Leonard, wrote a book of recollections about her.  His book may well contain some information about her hairstyles and why she chose them.  
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on March 11, 2006, 04:14:23 PM
Thanks for the info Ortino and CountessKate.  :)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: crotalo on March 12, 2006, 04:00:06 AM
Obviously. today and hundreds years ago only few women could have the gift of a Cindy Crawford's hair. In the case of MA, it seems she had an extraordinary quantity and she never used wigs, but mostly did. Hey girls, Would you really be able to built such towers? (only for women  :- ;D) . Real hair of MA still exiss. few years ago, some "mèches" were founded in Vienna. To send some curls to devoted relatives was a custom. so perhaps there are more.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 12, 2006, 04:17:45 AM
I'm not so sure about Marie-Antoinette's huge quantity of hair... She lost a great deal of it after the dauphin's birth (Joseph). Hormones, but, no doubt also those bad treatments ! So, she had her hair cut "2 fingers from my brow", she said, and chose this wonderful "à l'enfant" (child) hair dressing.

Later, she seemed to suffer from alopecia again, ater Varennes. She lost her red hair, and only the grey white remained. That's what Campan describes in her memoirs when she said she was all white.

Looking at her pictures, it's obvious she is losing some of her hair, as reported by Hortense Dufour and Antonia Fraser.

Furthermore, women used false hair they added to theirs. We can see this practice in "Jefferson in Paris". They were no real wigs, but hairpieces, so that this amount impression was possible.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: crotalo on March 12, 2006, 05:14:55 AM
Of course, Dear Coquelicot, almost all is possible in this life. I can not see where is the difference between wearing a wig and to cover an amount of false hair with four frontal hairs. The question is: " this was her hair". Obviously, I repeat, sometimes it was, sometimes not at all, and sometimes fifty-fifty. Depending of the age, genetics etc... Of course MA had a bigger quantity at the 70's. My mother for exemple has lost the half of the volume of her youth. She is a good coiffeuse. The Cindy's example is not at all frivole. Many women asked for having a look long hair similar. There is only an answer: try another look, darling! Solution? Yes: extensions. Nothing has changed in human nature in such questions.

  Marie Antoinette had certainly when she was dauphine and even queen, a privilegiated hair.

She had the natural gift of doing all what her fantasy or the fashion exiged, for in the 80's, the new mode à l'anglaise did'nt need so many hair, but she had still hair enaogh :). There is the true story of her hair became completely white in few time with the enormous stress of the last moments. this is a rare phenomene, but it's possible and contated even today in sme cases.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 12, 2006, 06:24:37 AM
Yes, crotalo, Fraser qualifies Marie-Antoinette's hair "thick", even if another historian (sorry, I don't remember which one... just that it's a man !  ;D) speak of soft, sweet hair. It's not incompatible, is it ?

The point still is : on portrait, whose hair do we see ? They have so different colours... while, in fact, she was sandy blond, if not auburn.

On later pics, in the 80th, she seems to have vaporous fragile hair. Surely the frisure damaged it...

Quote
There is the true story of her hair became completely white in few time with the enormous stress of the last moments. this is a rare phenomene, but it's possible and contated even today in sme cases.


... reported by Campan, so we must be very cautious ! It's the phenomen I described supra, sometimes called 'Marie Antoinette syndrom'. Campan locates this after Varennes, others after dauphin's death and others just before dying. Make your choice !  :-/

Surely, like many redhaired people, she became grey very young.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 12, 2006, 07:11:35 AM
Oh, yes, she is...
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Kimberly on March 12, 2006, 07:34:30 AM
Its not red here though ???
(http://www.ladyreading.net/marieantoinette/big/marie20.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Kimberly on March 12, 2006, 07:35:11 AM
She was very beautiful, no wonder you are so proud of her
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 12, 2006, 10:29:36 AM
She was redhaired, but had to hide it, because the court of Versailles didn't appreciate that colour. Madame du Barry called her "la petite rousse" (little red girl). Marie-Antoinette could use dying materials (?), or powders. But, under white powders, her hair looked rose :

(http://www.batguano.com/tnMarie70.jpg)

... or even orange. An american, Franklin, I think, said that French women used orange powders... actually, he had seen Antoinette's red hair under her powders !

It may seem a frivolous concern. In fact, it's not, and the French's hate for redhaired people is related to their xenophobia. It's a red Austrian whore they eventually led to the guillotine, alas... "a tall, redhaired animal", they said...
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on March 12, 2006, 10:43:14 AM
I think in those days red hair was linked to a violent temper, too.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 12, 2006, 11:45:56 AM
I don't know... or maybe they believe only sorceries had red hair ! What a pity... it's so beautiful !

I even read in a bio of Fersen a quotation telling that this man had given forbidden caresses to a woman having a wrong hair colour, meaning our queen, of course !
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: crotalo on March 13, 2006, 03:19:05 AM
What about the "souvenirs" found hyden in Wien old books and bibliotheques? They are golden fair. Are they false? :-/ Have you ever seen one of them?

By the way, I avoid my ignorance since I have to read Antonia's Fraser book. Is it so good? Until now I considered Sweiz's one the eight wonder.

Finally a little doubt. Leonard and Campan. They worked for the court at the same time, in different dates, they were rivals? I'm sure they had funny nicknames to refer each other :)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 13, 2006, 03:49:01 AM
A French collector has some of Antoinette's hair ( :-*), and showed them on television. They are sandy blond, she said. It's reported so in many biographies (Fraser, Bertière...).

I enjoyed Fraser's book, because it's full of empathy. She really tries to put herself into Antoinette's shoes, and she asks good questions. Some critics say she didn't look at sources enough. I don't know... Being raised in french culture, I appreciated an anglo-saxon eye on Marie-Antoinette's life !

Leonard was her hairdresser, Campan her chambermaid... how could they be rival ? :-/
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: crotalo on March 13, 2006, 06:06:57 AM
 (http://fotos.miarroba.com/thumb/2B443F4958234415608A1E44156061.jpg)  (http://album.miarroba.com/sarolte/0/41/)


Her daughter seems to have inherited her hair.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 13, 2006, 06:44:00 AM
Yes, seems so. Marie-Caroline of Naples, her sister, had the same hair. They looked alike, following the court of Vienna, and Madame Vigée Lebrun. I think Marie-Thérèse mother had this hair too.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 13, 2006, 08:17:13 AM
Interesting I have read that indeed when she first arrived to France her blond hair had some red in it, this is why du Barry called her Petite Rousse, however I thought that after that her hair became ash blond! I have always thought that her hair was ash blond, so no wonder it became white after Varennes.
 In fact what I read was that it was after the return from Varennes, when she took off her travel hat in the Tuileries that she found out that her hair had become white as an old lady!! So the theory that her hair was ash blonde made sense to me since it is I think easier to pass from ash blonde to white thatn to red hair to white.

  Besides if I am not mistakening du Barry was the only one to called her Rousse while teenage, does anybody called her rousse as a grown up woman??
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 13, 2006, 08:22:24 AM
Something else regarding Marie Therese d Angouleme hairs I am quite lost, because on her portrait has a child she was BLOND!!! there is no doubt about that, the few gravure from the Temple show her as a blond young woman! Then as a grow up womas she looks brunette in her portraits, I know that sometimes blond child grow up into brunette! But not all the time! However what are the chances that she became a brunette when both her parents were blond?

 ( I am a brunette, so I don`t really know much on the subject).
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on March 13, 2006, 10:23:41 AM
It's certainly not uncommon - I was blond till I was about six or seven and now my hair's completely dark brown.  :) And I don't think it's too unusual that she was a brunette while her parents were blond - both my godparents have black hair but all their children are blond.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 13, 2006, 10:41:48 AM
Interesting!!! ;D Thanks!
 What about MA`s hair was it ash blonde or reddish??
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 13, 2006, 12:12:26 PM
Quote
Besides if I am not mistakening du Barry was the only one to called her Rousse while teenage, does anybody called her rousse as a grown up woman??


Gazettes called her "un animal de grande taille, roux de poil" (a tall redhaired animal). This animal they led to the guillotine on Vendémiaire 25th, year II.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 13, 2006, 03:03:09 PM
Hey ! Who wondered about Leonard hairdresser ? Here he is, they say !

(http://www.muti.ch/immagini/cherubini/cheimmagini/Leonard-.jpg )
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 13, 2006, 03:39:37 PM
he looks weird!!! ::)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: crotalo on March 14, 2006, 04:52:45 AM
Perhaps MT d'Angouleme inherited dark hair from her Lorraine ancestors ( Charlotte la duchesse de Lorraine was brunette, so was Monsieur, and so Louis XIII) Who knows? That's known as "mendelian regression" :P
Yes, three "brunettes" ;D
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 15, 2006, 09:09:50 AM
Marie Therese`s hair change while in Prison Gomin said that her hair had turn "Chatain" which is  brown!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 15, 2006, 09:17:06 AM
That is, as already said here, very common for blond children. A lot of them become "chatain" as years go by... My father was a blonde boy, and his hair turned brown, almost black...
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 15, 2006, 10:29:13 AM
It looks a little reddish to me!

(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/kedvesem/PRD9.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 15, 2006, 10:45:02 AM
Yes, indeed. I think Charles had inherited his mother's hair. Sandy blond...
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: crotalo on March 16, 2006, 05:17:28 AM
Anyone knows how was the "coiffure à la Franklin"?It seems MA was very closed to Benjamin franklin. she took musical lessons with the extravagant crystal harmonica. so franklin invented bifocal glasses and we can see MA wearing glasses in "l'affaire du collier" film.There is an historical picture of MA and LXVI receiving Franklin in audience. so she was interested in Messmer practices of Hypnotism. Louis didn't like it at all.

 If i am not wrong, a MA portrait gifted to BF hangs today in a room of the White House. Any info?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: crotalo on March 16, 2006, 05:30:27 AM
nice pic. It seems as decolorated with powder chimic product. It would be interesting an ADN analyse. In coiffure it would be called a 7 ( golden blond) cupper highlight. When a natural hair mèche is traited with decoloration powder it losts gradually the original dark from black to brown, then reddish, yellow and finaly white. This is just the tone most people hate, for the process is stopped in a Chicken tone point wich is no precisely cool today :-/
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 16, 2006, 06:05:03 AM
I think the "coiffure à la Franklin" is a "catogan", dear Crotalo, that is to say a low poney tail. It was a hairdressing traditionnally used by men. Marie-Antoinette tried it, but Louis XVI didn't like it at all. This fashion eventually was dropped !
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: crotalo on March 17, 2006, 04:12:27 AM
Oh!! I have seen it once, particulary in "L'anglaise et le duc". Portraits don't show us often the back of the models :-/. I t was funny and marvelous. Thanks dear, you are an expert
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: pers on March 17, 2006, 04:49:49 AM
Sissi, are there any similar photos available of the hair of MA?  It will be nice to compare as to what have been discussed on this forum.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 17, 2006, 02:31:50 PM
      Marie Antoinette loved her children deeply, she was a devoted mother, present in their life as much as she could! However she was unhappy, even mad at the news of her last pregnancy (baby Sophie) ! She was annoid with the possibility of the pregnancy so much that the doctors were concern on how to break the news to her!

     She did not want to have too many children! But at the same time didn`t she realize that she was putting in jeopardy her own safety as queen, I think that she thought that she had done her role as a queen by giving the State 4 children! However 4 children was not much at the time! her mother had 16 children and Marie Caroline 18 because they knew how important heirs were not only to the throne but also in the case of Marie Caroline for their own safety as queen consort.

      Recently historians have believed that probably Louis XVI did not a problem but htat it was rather Marie Antoinette lack of "interest" for the "affair" that made things difficult!

 I think that she was a woman not so in touch with her time, in many aspect! She had a mind of her own, and was quite innovant for her time. She wanted to live her own life! with her friends, without court restrain, in her house....

  I think she had a very interesting personality! A personaluity I would like to discuss her with you!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 17, 2006, 02:40:46 PM
marie Antoinettte love children it is no secret as a matter of fact she "adopted three children" Armand, Zoe and Ernestine lambriquet!
  Armand became a revolutionnary, and Ernestine had a mysterious life!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: aussiechick12 on March 17, 2006, 06:11:39 PM
Quote
     Marie Antoinette loved her children deeply, she was a devoted mother, present in their life as much as she could! However she was unhappy, even mad at the news of her last pregnancy (baby Sophie) ! She was annoid with the possibility of the pregnancy so much that the doctors were concern on how to break the news to her!

      She did not want to have too many children! But at the same time didn`t she realize that she was putting in jeopardy her own safety as queen, I think that she thought that she had done her role as a queen by giving the State 4 children! However 4 children was not much at the time! her mother had 16 children and Marie Caroline 18 because they knew how important heirs were not only to the throne but also in the case of Marie Caroline for their own safety as queen consort.

       Recently historians have believed that probably Louis XVI did not a problem but htat it was rather Marie Antoinette lack of "interest" for the "affair" that made things difficult!

  I think that she was a woman not so in touch with her time, in many aspect! She had a mind of her own, and was quite innovant for her time. She wanted to live her own life! with her friends, without court restrain, in her house....

   I think she had a very interesting personality! A personaluity I would like to discuss her with you!


I have only just become interested about Marie and your post has helped me understand her a little bit more. So thanks!
I have ordered the biography of Marie by Antonia Fraser and I borrowed 'The Lost King of France' by Deborah Cadbury (about her child, Louis XVII) from the library. When I have finished these I will tell you what I think about her personality, because at the moment, I only know what you just told me!  ;)

Emma
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 17, 2006, 06:58:12 PM
I agree with you, dear Sissi, she was very innovative. She wanted to get rid of the etiquette the most she could, and live her own life. This she did in Trianon, first of all, and then in Saint-Cloud. It's a pity Saint-Cloud castle has been destroyed... for it was whole hers, with her own design...

She didn't want too many children, too, which was incredible for a queen of her time also. Representation and childbirthing were her role, and nothing else ! But she didn't intend it to be so ! And she had her own way... as Simone Bertière calls her "l'insoumise" (the rebel).

She was an artist, that's another part of her temper I'm fascinated with. Most of all a musician, who played harpsichord, harp, sang, and composed songs and musics. She painted, too, and made wonderful embroderies and tapestries. She played on stage, in her beautiful blue little theatre, she was Beaumarchais' Rosine, for instance.

And she was a tender heart, very loyal and devoted to her friends. She never dropped them. Although she had another favorite, she never stopped seeing Madame de Lamballe nor writing to her. She was there when Louise de Lamballe's brother died.

She was a tender, concerned and affectionate mother. She raised her children with her best friend, Madame de Polignac, together with hers, and even adopted children. She raised a girl, Enerstine, with her daughter Mousseline, to learn her to share and forget about hauteur.

And she loved pets ! Especially for doggies ! She had dogs' heads sculpted on the arms of a armchair, so that she could caress them anytime...
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 17, 2006, 06:59:09 PM
Do you know anything about Zoé, Sissi ?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: polignac on March 18, 2006, 06:42:54 AM
Do you know the dates of the adoption?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 19, 2006, 12:45:51 AM
You know I'm not good at figures, Polignac !  :o She adopted Armand before her first childbirthing, she was still a young girl, not even 20, I think. She adopted Philippine Lambriquet, servants' daughter, later, to raise her with her little Mousseline. She called the girl Ernestine.
About Zoé I know almost nothing... Just that I love this name !
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: crotalo on March 19, 2006, 04:35:19 AM
Quote
marie Antoinettte love children it is no secret as a matter of fact she "adopted three children" Armand, Zoe and Ernestine lambriquet!
   Armand became a revolutionnary, and Ernestine had a mysterious life!


 I had never heard. How interesting. Please, go on. In what sens Ernestine's life was mysterious?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 19, 2006, 06:47:20 AM
Some people say she actually was Louis XVI's daughter, fruit of an experiment he had tempted after his operation.  ::) Well... We must first of all admit there once was an surgical intervention !  ::)

She was raised with Mousseline, they say, for this reason, and mentioned among the "children of France" for she was the king's daughter. Ok... her name may be written in the august book because she was adopted, and considered "child of France". You don't laugh with adoption !  :)

Ernestine went to the Tuileries with the royal family. Few writers notice her presence, however. She didn't escape to Montmedy, and wasn't sent to the temple neither.

But...

After her family's death, poor Marie-Thérèse Charlotte was freed, and went away to Austria. She married the duke of Angoulème.

Not at all ! Some people believe a substitution occured ! Ernestine went to Austria, playing her role fine, for she knew how to deal with court habits. In the meantime, a charming young woman was hidden somewhere in the country... Charlotte, or Mousseline, now called "the dark lady"...

It's an amazing story !  :-/ I really don't know what to believe about this... Did Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette's daughter live in the middle of nowhere ?
Was she happy, first of all ?

If you are interested, I recommend a french site on the subject : http://madameroyale.free.fr/. The moderator is really interested in this substitution as well as in Madame Royale's life.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Ortino on March 19, 2006, 07:37:26 AM
Quote
Some people say she actually was Louis XVI's daughter, fruit of an experiment he had tempted after his operation.  ::) Well... We must first of all admit there once was an surgical intervention !  ::)


 Fraser seems to think otherwise. She does not indicate any surgery in her book and suggests that it was not necessary in Louis' case. Any thoughts on this discrepancy?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 19, 2006, 08:27:55 AM
The first writer to tell this surgery story is Stephan Zweig. He had access to the secrete correspondence between Marie-Thérèse and her ambassador Mercy. In these letters, there were several mentions of an operation. Zweig, deeply influenced by Freud, developped this analysis that is still predominent : Louis was impotent, Marie-Antoinette frustrated, so, he tryed to beg her mercy by letting her do what she wanted, while she was extravagant and frivolous because of her sexual frustration.

Nowadays, other historians have searched in different directions, and found that Mercy was actually lying to his empress, and trying to hide the fact that, actually, Marie-Antoinette was reluctant.

What happened between these two people, in reality ? We don't know exactly... When she arrived at Versailles, she was still a baby, affraid of sex and not ready for that at all. She hadn't even her periods ! Fortunately for her, Louis didn't rape her. Actually, it seems he wasn't very interested in the subject neither.

In fact, they didn't physically get along, and she was hurted. So, the whole consommation took years...

This, Mercy tryed to dissimulate, putting the blame on Louis. Nobody was to blame... They didn't fit, that's all !
Actually, Louis' diary, although very precise, doesn't mention any operation, nor interruptions in his hunting, while an intervention would take some days to recover. Historians now think there was no operation. But, for long, Zweig seducing freudian option was followed... and still is, I guess !  :o
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Ortino on March 19, 2006, 09:05:04 AM
Quote
What happened between these two people, in reality ? We don't know exactly... When she arrived at Versailles, she was still a baby, affraid of sex and not ready for that at all. She hadn't even her periods ! Fortunately for her, Louis didn't rape her. Actually, it seems he wasn't very interested in the subject neither.


Actually, Marie got her first period 2 months before her wedding in 1770--therefore, she was already a "woman" by the time she arrived at Versailles.

Quote
In fact, they didn't physically get along, and she was hurted. So, the whole consommation took years...
 

  I don't understand this--can you please explain?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 19, 2006, 09:40:53 AM
It's true she had her first period before she left Vienna, but, as it may happen to very young girls, they stopped. For several months, she hadn't her "générale", as she wrote to her mother. It's the evidence she wasn't ready for sex at all ! Simone Bertière, in my opinion her best biographer, said she was 14, but looked 12, so small and fragile !

Oh, excuse me for being crude, if you want a further explanation. Physically, I mean, sexually, he was too strong and she was too narrow. It may happen too...  :'( So, sexual intercourses hurted her a lot, poor child !  :'(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Ortino on March 19, 2006, 10:51:32 AM
Quote
It's true she had her first period before she left Vienna, but, as it may happen to very young girls, they stopped. For several months, she hadn't her "générale", as she wrote to her mother. It's the evidence she wasn't ready for sex at all ! Simone Bertière, in my opinion her best biographer, said she was 14, but looked 12, so small and fragile !

Oh, excuse me for being crude, if you want a further explanation. Physically, I mean, sexually, he was too strong and she was too narrow. It may happen too...  :'( So, sexual intercourses hurted her a lot, poor child !  :'(


I don't think anyone that young is physically prepared to have sex, particularly girls--their bodies are usually in early stages of puberty. I imagine that it would have been painful.

Sorry I made you explain that further.... I misunderstood what you wrote the first time.... :-[

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 19, 2006, 11:07:06 AM
Don't worry, dear Ortino... It's just that it makes me sad, because I love Marie-Antoinette so much, you know...  :'( So, I feel empathy...  :'(

I imagine this little girl, lost in golden Versailles, surrounded by all these vipers, thinking of her family she had to leave in Vienna...
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 20, 2006, 09:48:16 AM
Quote

I have only just become interested about Marie and your post has helped me understand her a little bit more. So thanks!
I have ordered the biography of Marie by Antonia Fraser and I borrowed 'The Lost King of France' by Deborah Cadbury (about her child, Louis XVII) from the library. When I have finished these I will tell you what I think about her personality, because at the moment, I only know what you just told me!  ;)

Emma



I am glad my post helped you understand her personality a little bit better.
I know that you will love the books.
 Hope to hear your opinion very soon ;D
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 20, 2006, 09:50:20 AM
Quote
I agree with you, dear Sissi, she was very innovative. She wanted to get rid of the etiquette the most she could, and live her own life. This she did in Trianon, first of all, and then in Saint-Cloud. It's a pity Saint-Cloud castle has been destroyed... for it was whole hers, with her own design...

She didn't want too many children, too, which was incredible for a queen of her time also. Representation and childbirthing were her role, and nothing else ! But she didn't intend it to be so ! And she had her own way... as Simone Bertière calls her "l'insoumise" (the rebel).

She was an artist, that's another part of her temper I'm fascinated with. Most of all a musician, who played harpsichord, harp, sang, and composed songs and musics. She painted, too, and made wonderful embroderies and tapestries. She played on stage, in her beautiful blue little theatre, she was Beaumarchais' Rosine, for instance.

And she was a tender heart, very loyal and devoted to her friends. She never dropped them. Although she had another favorite, she never stopped seeing Madame de Lamballe nor writing to her. She was there when Louise de Lamballe's brother died.

She was a tender, concerned and affectionate mother. She raised her children with her best friend, Madame de Polignac, together with hers, and even adopted children. She raised a girl, Enerstine, with her daughter Mousseline, to learn her to share and forget about hauteur.

And she loved pets ! Especially for doggies ! She had dogs' heads sculpted on the arms of a armchair, so that she could caress them anytime...




I agree it is a shame that Saint Cloud do not exist anymore it must have been sumptuous! She had a lot of taste!!
  It is interesting because the Louis XVI style is more the Marie Antoinette style!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 20, 2006, 10:17:36 AM
I agree completely, the operation seemed to have been a lie, as Coquelicot mentioned it there is no evidence of the operation in Louis XVI journal, it seems that she had no interest in the affair at all! she was not a physical woman just like empress Sissi! And the truth is that both of them found it very hard to go throught it!
 I think that it was the reason why she always said that she did not want to have many children! Sexuality was something dreadful for her and Louis. They never ever accustomed themselves to the act.

   I guess it has to do also with the fact that she did not have a proper education, she was completely ignorant, and probably lack the judgement to realize that motherhood was essential to queens because it gave them not only a true position as queen, it sort of legitimize them in their adoptive country! She was a long time regarded as an Asutrian due to the fact that she had not given France an heir. If you read her letters there is a difference of tone before and after the birth of Louis Joseph. She puts her son rights before anything else.

    I think that sometimes she lacks judgement, because the truth is that it must have been hard to sleep with men who they did not love. However Marie Therese and marie Caroline understood perfectly the true role of motherhood in queenship, havind an heir was primordial for the safety of the country and the ruling house. They new that mortality was high even in royal courts, both her mother and sister lost a couple of children along the way. They had to provide a secure line of succesion, Marie Antoinette thought that with two sons she had done her job! I am sure that she never thought that both of them could die, at least not before Louis Joseph`s death.

   Louis Charles was stronger than his brother but was not a healthy child either, he was a very nervous child, ans the truth is that even if there had been no revolution he could have died as Louis Joseph did of consumption.

   
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 20, 2006, 10:30:51 AM
I know ther is a special pos for Marie Antoinette`s portrait but I recently found this one, and I thought she looks really pretty:

(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/kedvesem/marieantoinetteDauphine.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 20, 2006, 10:31:36 AM
I guess it was easier for Marie-Thérèse, dear Sissi, since she was just crazy about her man ! With regard to Marie-Caroline, she was very interested in sex... On the contrary, Marie-Antoinette, following her brother Joseph, had no temper...

She neraly died during her first childbirthing, and had several miscarriages. Maybe, also, at the end of her life, an uterus cancer or, at least, gynecological troubles. This woman was not build to bear many children !

What could she do to be eventually adopted by France ? Even before she arrived in Versailles, the Aunts already called her "the Austrian girl" !
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 20, 2006, 10:48:03 AM
Unfortunetaly you are right! she would probably have died from an uterus cancer if the guillotine had not done her job! I do not believe that she would have last long! she seemed to have had a good health besides that, right?
 Louis XVI seemed to have had a strong constitution, how sad that both her children were delicate!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 20, 2006, 11:26:12 AM
Extract of Louis XVI journal!


(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/kedvesem/journaldelouisXVI1.jpg)

(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/kedvesem/journaldelouisXVI2.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 20, 2006, 11:26:53 AM
In the last one You can see "Rien" "Nothing"
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 20, 2006, 11:27:32 AM
Yes, Sissi...  :'( Baby Sophie died so soon...  :'( But, with regard to Charles, we may imagine inprisonment damaged his health a lot, for, as a little boy playing in trianon gardens, he was as strong "as a peasant" ! Mousseline was very healthy too.

Only poor Joseph was too delicate...  :'(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on March 20, 2006, 11:28:46 AM
"Rien" meant no hunting success.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 20, 2006, 11:34:02 AM
He hunt pretty much every day than???

   I read that on July 14 her wrote Rien too!!!!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Ortino on March 20, 2006, 12:10:17 PM
Quote

    I guess it has to do also with the fact that she did not have a proper education, she was completely ignorant, and probably lack the judgement to realize that motherhood was essential to queens because it gave them not only a true position as queen, it sort of legitimize them in their adoptive country! She was a long time regarded as an Asutrian due to the fact that she had not given France an heir. If you read her letters there is a difference of tone before and after the birth of Louis Joseph. She puts her son rights before anything else.


    Louis Charles was stronger than his brother but was not a healthy child either, he was a very nervous child, ans the truth is that even if there had been no revolution he could have died as Louis Joseph did of consumption.

    


       I think that most girls in her position were ignorant about sex--I imagine that their mothers were very sparse on details about the event, but rather emphasized submission. Having grown up in a royal household, I cannot imagine Marie or anyone else royal for that matter not understanding the importance of heirs. That's partly why royal wives were usually  pregnant immediately after their marriages--heirs were crucial to the survival of dynasties.

  Based on what I've read, Louis Charles is always presented as a healthy child, a sharp contrast to Louis Joseph. It seems that he died from tuberculosis or a similiar condition, which he probably wouldn't have developed had he not lived in the Tower. I believe that had he not been confined there, he would have gone on to be a robust, healthy man.

  Yes, Louis XVI hunted very frequently. It seems to be one of the few things he was skilled at.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 20, 2006, 12:44:15 PM
I guess these are the things we will never know! I believe louis charles might have been a good ruler, Louis XVI was very concern with the education of his children, Marie Therese had a good education for a woman at the time, Louis Joseph was said to be very intelligent, he was a witty boy! Too bad he died so young and never ruled! :-[
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on March 20, 2006, 01:24:03 PM
Globe Terrestre du Dauphin I think it was made in 1786 for Louis Joseph


(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/kedvesem/globeterrestre.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Lisa on April 08, 2006, 02:15:05 PM
The reconstitution of Marie Antoinette's cellar at the Conciergerie (in the museum of the Conciergerie in Paris) (http://img431.imageshack.us/img431/9927/photo0588rn.th.jpg) (http://img431.imageshack.us/my.php?image=photo0588rn.jpg)

And the real place, also in the Conciergerie, transfomed as a chapell by her brother-in-law when he became king Louis XVIII (http://img317.imageshack.us/img317/8400/photo0534kd.th.jpg) (http://img317.imageshack.us/my.php?image=photo0534kd.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: bell_the_cat on April 08, 2006, 02:38:16 PM
Quote
Thank you, dear Pers ! I'm especially interested in sugar, because this was very expensive, and considered a luxuous matter. What to thing about all these food ? I don't know, and often wonder... especially for the queen, who didn't like meat that much. People found normal to have a huge series of plates and only touch some of them... ?

It's even stranger when we think that others usual products were not really supply. What about hygiena, so important for Marie-Antoinette ? Clothes and so on... On trial, she would speak of "mes hardes et celles de mes enfants" (my children's dirties old clothes and mine)

Sugar came from the French colonies particularly Saint Domingue (now Haiti and the Dominican Republic) where plantations worked by African slaves produced large amounts of sugar for France. Although it was a luxury I think by the 1780s it would have been a standard item for a prosperous bourgeois household. It was in this year (1792) that the slave rebellions, inspired by the revolution in France broke out. The revolutionaries were hesitant to apply the principle of "Liberté Egalité Faternité" to the colonies.

Mary Queen of Scots also enjoyed lavish meals during her imprisonment. Each of her meals consisted of two courses. Each course consisted of sixteen dishes so that she could choose what she wanted. So every day two meals (sixty-four dishes) were prepared for her!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Ortino on April 08, 2006, 06:20:07 PM
Quote
Quote
Thank you, dear Pers ! I'm especially interested in sugar, because this was very expensive, and considered a luxuous matter. What to thing about all these food ? I don't know, and often wonder... especially for the queen, who didn't like meat that much. People found normal to have a huge series of plates and only touch some of them... ?

It's even stranger when we think that others usual products were not really supply. What about hygiena, so important for Marie-Antoinette ? Clothes and so on... On trial, she would speak of "mes hardes et celles de mes enfants" (my children's dirties old clothes and mine)

Sugar came from the French colonies particularly Saint Domingue (now Haiti and the Dominican Republic) where plantations worked by African slaves produced large amounts of sugar for France. Although it was a luxury I think by the 1780s it would have been a standard item for a prosperous bourgeois household. It was in this year (1792) that the slave rebellions, inspired by the revolution in France broke out. The revolutionaries were hesitant to apply the principle of "Liberté Egalité Faternité" to the colonies.

Mary Queen of Scots also enjoyed lavish meals during her imprisonment. Each of her meals consisted of two courses. Each course consisted of sixteen dishes so that she could choose what she wanted. So every day two meals (sixty-four dishes) were prepared for her!

 Martinique was also another major island for sugar export. I agree that by the 1780's this was probably a standard item for the French bourgeoisie, among other things. The Haitian slave rebellions began in 1791, not 1792, on the island of Hispaniola.  

 I find it extremely ironic that although the French people hated the luxurious lifestyle of the French royal family, they stilled allowed them to live in rather sumptuous quarters at this point. It is one of those aspects of history that I will never understand.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: palatine on April 12, 2006, 03:34:00 PM
Henri IV was once warned by a fortuneteller that if he ever allowed his wife to be crowned, he would die soon afterwards.  He refrained from doing so for many years, in part because of the expense involved, and perhaps because he was influenced by the prophecy, for it was a superstitious age.  In 1610, he began making preparations to go to war and decided to have her crowned so that it would be easier for her to become Regent in case he died in battle.  On the day after her coronation, he was stabbed to death.

In May 1715, there was an eclipse of the sun.  Many interpreted it as a sign that Louis XIV would soon die.  Louis was amused by the idea and did not take it seriously, but within a few months he was indeed dead.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Sissi on August 23, 2006, 02:50:17 PM
Marie Antoinete at the Hameau du Trianon

(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/kedvesem/MarieAntoinetteaTrianon.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: palatine on October 11, 2006, 09:14:17 AM
A British historian, Dr. Simon Burrows, has an interesting theory about who really wrote some of the vicious pamphlets that maligned Marie Antoinette:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060929/wl_uk_afp/britainfrancehistory_060929193241

http://www.mg.co.za/articlepage.aspx?area=/breaking_news/breaking_news__international_news/&articleid=285374
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: RealAnastasia on October 11, 2006, 11:26:03 PM
Well, yes. I've read somewhere else this theory, but we must also admit that some of the more wilds stories avout Marie-Antoinette's naughtyness were conceived by the Duke of Orleans.This was proved even by biographers like Stefan Zweig and Stanley Loomis . Duke of Orleans was one of the first in France who spread gossips not only about Marie-Antoinette but about Louis XVI himslef. Of course, it seems he wanted the throbe for himself. But at least he had that he deserved: the same guillotine where his cousin was send. We can't forget that his vote was decisive to kill Louis XVI.

RealAnastasia.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 12, 2006, 04:18:54 AM
Yes poetic justice...Live by the sword die by the sword. Orleans derserved his fate.  >:(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on October 12, 2006, 05:37:20 AM
I agree with you both. This would be a rather light reason... Marie-Antoinette was first maligned as an Austrian, by the Aunts, than by Provence who wanted to finally put his fat ass on the throne, and by Orleans, for the same reasons. By acting so for serving their private interests, those men considerably helped the upscoming revolution. They made of the queen the weakest link through which the whole monarchy concept could be destroyed.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Lucien on October 12, 2006, 10:16:07 AM
A British historian, Dr. Simon Burrows, has an interesting theory about who really wrote some of the vicious pamphlets that maligned Marie Antoinette:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060929/wl_uk_afp/britainfrancehistory_060929193241

http://www.mg.co.za/articlepage.aspx?area=/breaking_news/breaking_news__international_news/&articleid=285374

Dr.Simon Burrows book on the conspiracy will be published end of this month,miss Sofia Coppola,and many others,might have to re-write the script(s).The title;""Blackmail,scandal and revolution,London's French libelestes,1758 -1792",Manchester University Press,and I think it's worth every BP,fifty of 'm.

Dr.Simon Burrows:
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/history/staff/burrows.htm
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Lucien on October 12, 2006, 10:51:37 AM
A British historian, Dr. Simon Burrows, has an interesting theory about who really wrote some of the vicious pamphlets that maligned Marie Antoinette:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060929/wl_uk_afp/britainfrancehistory_060929193241

http://www.mg.co.za/articlepage.aspx?area=/breaking_news/breaking_news__international_news/&articleid=285374

Dr.Simon Burrows book on the conspiracy will be published end of this month,miss Sofia Coppola,and many others,might have to re-write the script(s).The title;""Blackmail,scandal and revolution,London's French libelestes,1758 -1792",Manchester University Press,and I think it's worth every BP,fifty of 'm.

Dr.Simon Burrows:
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/history/staff/burrows.htm

A preview at the movie...

http://sonypictures.com/movies/marieantoinette/index.html
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: palatine on October 12, 2006, 01:43:04 PM
Well, yes. I've read somewhere else this theory, but we must also admit that some of the more wilds stories avout Marie-Antoinette's naughtyness were conceived by the Duke of Orleans.This was proved even by biographers like Stefan Zweig and Stanley Loomis . Duke of Orleans was one of the first in France who spread gossips not only about Marie-Antoinette but about Louis XVI himslef. Of course, it seems he wanted the throbe for himself. But at least he had that he deserved: the same guillotine where his cousin was send. We can't forget that his vote was decisive to kill Louis XVI.

There can be no doubt that most of the ugly stories about Marie Antoinette which circulated at the French court and among the upper echelon of the nobility were started by Philippe Egalite, Mesdames, and the Comte de Provence (later Louis XVIII).  However, their slanders couldn't reach the bulk of the French people except in pamphlet form.  If Burrows is right that slanderous pamphlets about Marie Antoinette were kept under lock and key before the fall of the Bastille, it puts a new spin on things, and raises some questions.  Marie Antoinette was unpopular long before the Revolution broke out, but would she have become the object of such frenzied widespread hatred if the pamphlets hadn't been discovered and published?  If all of the pamphlets had been destroyed upon confiscation by Louis XVI's agents, would the royal family in general and Marie Antoinette in particular have had a better chance of riding the Revolution out?

Like Lucien, I am really looking forward to reading Burrows' book.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: RealAnastasia on October 12, 2006, 11:50:39 PM
Maybe you are right, Palatine...But Louis XVI was far from being the tryrant depicted in some Revlutionnary pamphlets. He didn't act energically and the events surpassed him.  :'(

RealAnastasia.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Lucien on October 13, 2006, 03:41:23 PM
Statues of TM King Louis XVI and Queen Marie Antoinette at the Basilique Saint Denis,St.Denis:

http://www.royaltyguide.nl/images-countries/france/stdenis/71.JPG

and:
http://www.royaltyguide.nl/images-families/bourbon/bbfrance2/1754%20Louis-05.JPG

http://www.royaltyguide.nl/images-countries/france/stdenis/72C.jpg

http://www.royaltyguide.nl/images-countries/france/stdenis/72D.JPG

Courtesy Mardam's wonderfull site.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 15, 2006, 08:47:33 PM
Would love to St. Denis one day !  :D
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 16, 2006, 04:40:47 AM
Yes...The terror. I often wondered if she was givern a fair trial, would she be still deemed guilty of treason ???  ???
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on October 16, 2006, 03:41:08 PM
Yes!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 16, 2006, 03:54:58 PM
Yes she was guilty of treason, on the revolutionaries terms anyway. She had been plotting for foreign armies to invade France and restore the monarchy. You can't blame her of that, but she was technically guilty. During the trial Marie Antoinette maintained that as a woman she had  taken no part in politics, and therefore could have had no knowledge of the negociations. This was a lie, but she was (again understandably) desperately trying to save her own life.

Madame Elisabeth, when confronted with the same accusations, said yes, she was guilty, and was proud of it (which was why her trial didn't last very long).
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on October 16, 2006, 04:17:18 PM
 In most countries, treason is punishable by the death penalty.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 16, 2006, 08:52:34 PM
Well...I read that there wasn't enough evidence to put her away had it been a fair trial.  ???
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on October 16, 2006, 11:18:09 PM
And that is why, Parisian, the French people swept you and your kind away into the dust bin of history and haven't looked back since.
The evidence presented against both Louis and Marie at their trials were the letters discovered in a large iron safe found in a secret niche in the wall of the Tuilleries Palace. The letters proved conclusively that the king and queen were engaged in treason with foreign powers. All the other stuff presented was overkill, and even Robespierre acknowledged the prosecutor had made a mistake in the hideous business of the son's testimony.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 17, 2006, 01:45:31 AM
The accusation of incest wasn't the main charge against MA. The prosecutors obviously feared that some of the jury
might tend to the opinion that MA had a) either not taken part in politics or b) been justified in corresponding with foreign powers about the possibility of invading France. Therefore they decided to open with a character assassination, which ironically had the effect of gaining sympathy for the former queen.

However, as James says, the evidence was clear that she had been corresponding with the foreign powers, who at that point were not far from Paris.....
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 17, 2006, 01:48:39 AM
In most countries, treason is punishable by the death penalty.

This is fortunately not the case today, as most countries have abolished the death penalty. Most of those who retain it, retain it for murder only.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 17, 2006, 04:09:38 AM
In the event after 911. The thing about loyalty to one's country and laws against treason have repealed. I wonder if that inlude death as well...?

As for MA, she was loyal to her caste (being Royalty) and divine rights of kings to rule. It does not come to her that she was doing anything wrong against a government that was made up by mobs.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on October 17, 2006, 10:22:41 AM
I agree that we could not accuse Marie-Antoinette of high treason the way we consider it nowadays. It would be an anachronism. She could not consider the revolution, which was by then led by factions, legitimate. She had no notion of nation the way we think it today. In her eyes, the only legitimate power was this kingship by divine right she fought so hard for. Seeing this monarchy blessed by God in danger, it was normal that she calls the other kings and queens for help.

Furthermore, at that moment, what did this revolution bring to the people ? Bloodsheds, slaughter, hunger and poverty. On the contrary, she constantly refers in her letters to the happiness of her people. In my view, she was completely logical.

Who decided to declare the war ? The revolutionaries.

And Marie-Antoinette was imprisoned in the conciergerie only to influence the Austrian government, and to force them to negociations. When the jacobine faction noticed that the Austrian emperor was not ready for that, and that he did not care at all for this aunt he did not even know, it was too late. To send her back to the temple would have lacked any credibility. She was thus sent to trial... if we can call a "trial" this maskerade by which she was already condamned since the beginning.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on October 17, 2006, 12:55:45 PM
1. She could not consider the revolution...legitimate. She had no notion of nation... Louis had taken an oath to the Consitution of 1790. It established the revolution as very legitimate and clearly defined the nation. As queen she should have supported her husband. Either they were false hypocrites who lied to their people or they were guilty of treason to the nation which he had taken a solemn oath to defend and protect.
2. It was normal that she calls the other kings and queens for help. Any ruler who calls in foreign soldiers to shoot down and kill thier own people are beneath contempt, and deserve anything that the people do to them.
3. The "revolution" began because Louis' government had run out of ideas and was bankrupt. It brought to France The Declaration of the Rights of Man, a constitution in which the people shared in the governing of their lives, it took the government of one of Europe's most advanced nations out of the hands of a weak indecisive man who had totallyl lost the respect of the aristocracy, the middle class, and the workers  and who had driven his nation into bankruptcy and put it into the hands of the people where it belonged.
4. Who declared the war. Actually it was the foreign powers who declared war on France and began an invasion. It was this that doomed Louis and Marie. It led to the bloody attack on the Tuileries that forced them to flee to the Convention where the monarchy was abolished and they were sent to the Tower. Had there been no foreign intervention it is just quite possible the king and queen might have survived as constitutional monarchs.  If they had hadn't been so false and two faced about it.
5. Louis XVI. now no longer king, was given a fair trial. It was before the National Assembly. He was allowed to see the evidence against him, to have whatever legal counsel he choose, and to defend himself freely in the court. The voting on his sentences was by the entire assembly, and it was fairly conducted. He even came close to escaping death. Marie's trial was a foregone conclusion. She realized that and made no real attempt to defend herself, but then she had played so false with her own people what did she expect.
6. Louis and Marie showed they were clueless as to the real situtation. The absolute monarchy had died in 1789 amd was a rotting corpse. Thier pathetic attempts to breath life back into the corpse, and ala Dr. Frankenstein, give life to the dead was hopless. Had they had good sense to realize this and adapt to what was a reality they might have died peacefull in their beds in the palace as king and queen.  Even Louis XVIII and Charles X didn't attempt to revive the absolute monarchy. The Bourbons did at least learn something.

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on October 17, 2006, 02:33:21 PM
I agree changes to the old system were necessary. Louis XVI had inheritated a deliquescent kingdom. He knew it, and had proposed reforms with his ministre Calonne. The king was let down by his clergy and his nobility, who did not intend to loose their privileges.

Actually, he was a progressive king.

The war he accepted to help the American citizens caused a terrible deficit, far more important than any court expense.

The king accepted the constitution because he had no other choice. I agree he was lost and confuse. But he was a good man, he considered the people his children, and would in no case spread their blood. He always refused to shoot at them, even when, according to Napoleon, who would be less scrupulous, shooting would have saved his crown.

I don't regard his trial a fair one. Scholars wonder about those famous documents found in this famous "iron box".

And for the queen, all she hoped from the European kings and queens was a cohalition, that would impress the factions. She did not call for war. I agree she was naive, but she really hoped that this armed cohalition, standing on the borders, would frighten the revolutionaries. Neither Marie-Antoinette nor Louis declared the war. Louis was forced to by the factions, which thought that it was the only way to save their revolution in front of the old monarchist Europe.

Marie-Antoinette never stopped fighting for the kingship by divine right, for it was the only power she considered legitimate. She thought this revolution, in her eyes this anarchy, would be an awful and bloody parenthese in the French history. She wanted to transmit the throne intact to her son, the heir of Louis XVI.

For this, she was ready to fight till her death. Which she did. She replied cleverly, with wit and sensibily on her trial. She fought like a lioness.

I would like to think also that France could have spared their lives and got a constitutional monarchy. But I frankly doubt it. I rather think that many people worked very hard on establishing a republic, for years. They slowly spread this ideal though the lodges of free-masonry. I think it is a process nothing could avoid.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on October 17, 2006, 04:07:53 PM
And, what did the revolution bring? I might add the Code Napoleon, the Arc de Triompe, twenty years of glory, and one of the most glorious and stirring national anthems of all time. Anyone who would equate O Richard, O Mon Roi with La Marseillaise is either tone deaf or seriously musically challenged.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on October 17, 2006, 04:54:01 PM
And you honestly think that France under a restored absolute monarchy would make it better! Oh, please!
And talk about superficial. The culture you say France inspired in the world under the monarchy consisted of  food, fashion, and language, oh, and furniture. France was stagnating under an outdated feudal system while Britain was leading the world in technological innovation. The Germans had become leaders in music, philosophy and military organization. And, if the absolute monarchy of Louis XVI had been so wonderful, pray explain why it folded so quickly with hardly a shot fired?
As for Louis taking the oath under threat, he took it. If he considered it to be under threat and against his will he should have had the fortitude to have refused. He should have said, kill me but I won't accept or swear to that constitution. He played false, doing one thing and then in secret conspiring against it. Not only was he physically fat but he was also morally flabby.
The French were right to sweep him and his corrupt system away.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on October 18, 2006, 12:49:27 PM
This debate has strayed far from the topic of Marie Antoinette, but as long as the moderator dosen't intervene. The libraries are full of books on this topic and thus we certainly aren't going to settle the issues with these blogs. I will answer your points, but because you range over a wide area of issues it will take some deliberation and thought before I can make any cogent comments in a few words. Please bear with me, for be assured I am not silent.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 18, 2006, 03:56:07 PM
This debate has strayed far from the topic of Marie Antoinette

My apologies James, you're quite right. This isn't really the right thread for this kind of discussion - maybe someone should start a new one.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Agneschen on October 19, 2006, 02:57:45 AM
And, what did the revolution bring?
La Terreur.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 19, 2006, 02:58:12 AM
Indeed...it was intended to dicuss if you think that the subject of this thread, Marie Anoinette was guilty of treason, since some put as she was "murdered" rather than "executed" as a criminal.  ???
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on October 19, 2006, 07:29:33 AM
Thank you, dear ! I did not know this pic ! Very touching...
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Silja on October 22, 2006, 03:32:42 PM
The evidence presented against both Louis and Marie at their trials were the letters discovered in a large iron safe found in a secret niche in the wall of the Tuilleries Palace. The letters proved conclusively that the king and queen were engaged in treason with foreign powers.

This is by no means the case.

"Susan Dunn, in The Deaths of Louis XVI, and David Jordan, in The King's Trial, are quite wrong in stating respectively that the safe [armoire de fer] 'contained his secret correspondence with Austria'  and the letter to Breteuil I have discussed on page 140. Even hostile historians in the French republican tradition do not claim as much but rather that though his accusers rightly suspected Louis of conspiring with foreign rulers to intervene in the internal affairs of France, they did not actually produce evidence at his trial to substantiate  the charge. Such, for example, is the view of the Marxist/Neo-Jacobin historian Albert Soboul, who adds, 'in this respect light was not shed until after the king's death'.
What the documents in the iron safe - and those captured in the sack of the Tuileries - do demonstrate is Louis's relation with Mirabeau, La Fayette,  Dumouriez and what Soboul terms 'other lesser personages, all engaged in the counter-revolution';  also his spending of considerable sums of money to win over public support at the level of popular politics and through subsidizing the royalist press. Jaurès, however, rightly observes that one cannot accuse men such as Mirabeau and La Fayette, the heroes of 1789, or Dumouriez, the saviour of France at Valmy, of counter-revolution without condemning the Revolution itself - ... "(John Hardman, Louis XVI, p.158f.).
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Silja on October 22, 2006, 03:57:04 PM

4. Who declared the war. Actually it was the foreign powers who declared war on France and began an invasion. pathetic attempts to breath life back into the corpse, and ala Dr. Frankenstein, give life to the dead was hopless.


It was the French National Assembly which declared war on Austria on 20 April 1792 and thus began the war. It was the French who subsequently invaded Belgium.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Silja on October 22, 2006, 03:58:17 PM
Well...I read that there wasn't enough evidence to put her away had it been a fair trial.  ???

Which is correct.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Silja on October 22, 2006, 04:09:22 PM
And, what did the revolution bring? I might add the Code Napoleon, the Arc de Triompe, twenty years of glory, and one of the most glorious and stirring national anthems of all time.

It brought all the excellent things everybody is familiar with, but at the same time, after its abberation, it also brought nationalism, the first totalitarian system the Western world had seen, and not twenty years of glory, except perhaps for the French, but twenty years of war.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 22, 2006, 04:10:36 PM
Just a gentle reminder that the topic of this thread is 'Question About Marie Antoinette'.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Silja on October 22, 2006, 04:27:52 PM
Just a gentle reminder that the topic of this thread is 'Question About Marie Antoinette'.

OK, I got it, but I find it very hard not to reply to some of the above-made statements, which I disagree with  :P. But I will stop short at it here then although I'd have a lot to add   :(.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 23, 2006, 02:09:44 PM
Just a gentle reminder that the topic of this thread is 'Question About Marie Antoinette'.

OK, I got it, but I find it very hard not to reply to some of the above-made statements, which I disagree with  :P. But I will stop short at it here then although I'd have a lot to add   :(.

Feel free to start a new thread on the subject you're discussing, Silja.  ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 23, 2006, 10:24:48 PM
Yes...Do that. It is an interesting topic.  ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: palatine on November 03, 2006, 12:29:24 PM
I have taken the liberty of editing James's original post in order to have enough space for my reply.

1. She could not consider the revolution...legitimate... Louis had taken an oath to the Consitution... As queen she should have supported her husband. Either they were false hypocrites who lied to their people or they were guilty of treason to the nation which he had taken a solemn oath...
2. ....Any ruler who calls in foreign soldiers to shoot down and kill thier own people are beneath contempt....
3. The "revolution" began because Louis' government had run out of ideas and was bankrupt.
4. ...the monarchy was abolished and they were sent to the Tower.
5. ...Marie's trial was a foregone conclusion. She realized that and made no real attempt to defend herself, but then she had played so false with her own people what did she expect.
6. ...The absolute monarchy had died in 1789 amd was a rotting corpse.

1.  Many thought the revolution was illegitimate because it was lurching along under the guidance of different groups of men who represented special interest groups with extremist viewpoints, not the nation of France.  Many wanted it crushed because it was leading to chaos and because it was, in some ways, like George Orwell's Animal Farm in action.  There were widespread mixed feelings about whether France should be a republic, a constitutional monarchy, or an absolute monarchy.  This conflict was not resolved by open debate or free elections, but by propaganda, the guillotine, and mob justice.  Louis swore an oath to uphold the Constitution and republic under duress; he knew that his beloved wife, sister, and children would be turned over to the tender mercies of a mob if he didn’t give the oath.  If his loved ones had been in a place of safety, he might have emulated his ancestor, Charles I, and allowed himself to be murdered before he gave the oath, but it wasn't just his own life that was at risk, and well he knew it.  The oath shouldn’t be considered binding upon him, nor should it be considered binding upon Marie Antoinette, since she was an individual, not her husband’s pinky finger.  It's my understanding that she did not have a coronation ceremony, so she never swore an oath of any kind to the French people.  Further, there is no evidence that Louis ordered her to respect the oath that had been wrung from him.

2.  During revolts and civil wars, it was not uncommon for rulers to use foreign troops against their people.  During the Fronde, Cardinal Mazarin, who was secretly married to Anne of Austria, the Regent, was banished by the Frondeurs.  He went to Germany and raised troops.  He invaded France and rejoined the royal family, and ultimately crushed the Fronde with the help of the foreign troops (and a lot of deal-making).   During the English Civil War, the English Parliament cut a deal with Scotland and used the Scottish army, in conjunction with its own, to win the war.  Louis and Marie Antoinette didn’t do anything that Mazarin and the English Parliament (and other rulers) didn’t do; the only difference was that Louis and Marie Antoinette were unsuccessful, and the others weren't.  There’s an old saying that victors write the history books...

3.  The revolution began because Louis inherited a lot of debts and a government that was an Augean stable of corruption.  He tried to introduce reforms, but he couldn’t act quickly enough for his people or slowly enough for his nobles.  Another reason it took place was because Louis bankrolled the American Revolution even though he really couldn't afford to do so, which is why I have always had a soft spot in my heart for him, even though he was awkward, shy and not particularly good-looking. 

4.  The royal family was imprisoned in a building known as the Temple, not the Tower.  I believe that someone else effectively answered the other points you raised in an earlier post in the old thread, so I'll skip this one.

5.  Marie Antoinette did not have what every human being has the right to have when they are accused of wrongdoing: an impartial judge and time to prepare a defense, examine documents, and consult with her attorney.  If she was put on trial today (as has been done for Richard III), I believe that she’d be found not guilty because, to put it mildly, there are holes in the prosecution’s case that a good defense attorney could drive a Mack truck through.

6.  In 1793, the monarchy was not a rotting corpse.  There were plots, there were risings, there were powerful revolutionaries willing to switch sides for the right price, and there were foreign troops spoiling for a fight.  All that was really needed was a leader who had clout, cunning, connections, a ruthless streak, and the ability to act as a free agent.  Robespierre realized that Marie Antoinette was the one person who might be able to pull off a successful counterrevolution and that it was too dangerous to let her live, which was why she was condemned to death by a kangaroo court and murdered. 
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: ilyala on November 06, 2006, 04:28:44 AM
i believe of marie antoinette just what i believe about the other dethroned and beheaded monarchs: wrong person at the wrong time.

the monarchy was indeed a rotten corpse. it had been for ages. i for one would blame louis 14th: he personally was a hard working man with good intentions but what he basically did was make the monarchy very dependent on the person of the king. sometimes having a weak king (the first hannoverian kings of england) helps the country and the monarchy - the country has the opportunity to get involved, to learn how to get involved in a peaceful manner and in collaboration rather than opposition with the king. louis 14th taught his people to be ignorrant because they would be taken care of by the king.

unfortunatly louis 14th was followed by some successors that were unable or unwilling to continue his work. louis 15th was lazy and indolent and his unbelievable sex drive led to a lot of wealth that should have been used to reform the nation getting in the hands of his mistresses. while they had palaces and expensive jewels, the people were hungering on the street. however, louis 15th was charismatic enough to keep the people quiet. his grandson wasn't.

louis 16th was hard-working and willing but i think he was completely unfit to be a monarch. while he was not stupid, there are many ways of intelligence, and he did not have the intelligence of a ruler, of a tactician. he was not charismatic. he seemed weak and completely incapable. the people were still hungry and even if he tried he managed to do nothing about it. therefor, the revolution.

what was marie antoinette's role in all this? had she married a strong monarch with a strong country, she would have probably been remembered like queen alexandra of england: stylish, beautiful, a perfect image for the monarchy. unfortunatly stylish queens are acceptable only when you've got food to put on the table. when you don't you can't help but think 'the money for that dress would have paid my food for a year.' and that's when hate comes in. and anger. and revolution.

had she married a strong king she would have made him stronger. but she married a weak king and she made him weaker. i can understand that she acted the way she knew she should, the way she was taught, she tried to be royal and beautiful, but that was not what was needed of her. but i can also understand why the people hated her. and that hate was the reason she was executed. the trial was a mockery - no matter what she would have been charged off, they would have found her guilty because they wanted her dead.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: RomanovFan on November 06, 2006, 04:01:09 PM
In one respect, Marie Antoinette was indeed innocent. She was a young, naive 14-year-old girl, with no idea on how to rule a country. She was forced to marry a somewhat dimwited crown prince, a year older than herself, who was in the same boat. Both of them were unprepared to rule, especially alone. What did the country expect when two children were put on a throne by themselves?

In another, Marie Antoinette, did commit treason. She had lied about something (I can't remember what. I watched the 2-hour documentary about her on PBS a few weeks ago), but that didn't mean she deserved to die the way she did. If anything, the queen was guilty of being uninformed and being too sheltered for her role as an absolute monarch. Some of this, I think, was her mother's fault. It seems all Maria Theresa cared about was gaining alliances and she used her children, particularly her daughters, as pawns to fullfill that wish.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Silja on November 06, 2006, 05:23:25 PM

louis 16th was hard-working and willing but i think he was completely unfit to be a monarch. while he was not stupid, there are many ways of intelligence, and he did not have the intelligence of a ruler, of a tactician. he was not charismatic. he seemed weak and completely incapable. the people were still hungry and even if he tried he managed to do nothing about it. therefor, the revolution.


I agree Louis XVI wasn't the ideal ruler precisely because he wasn't charismatic or assertive. Shy people never make good rulers. He was however quite a bright person - within the limits of his traditional education of course. Unlike others he was actually aware one could never rule a people by force. One reason he always shied away from violence, one reason he swore the oath when in reality he rejected the constitution and the ideas behind it. At the time Louis knew it was the constitution the French people wanted. So he complied with it, intending to let it come into effect and then let the French people see for themselves that it would not work. This was the king's initial strategy, a strategy which however failed. 

But the reason the Revolution broke out had not so much to do with the personal character of the king but with the fact that the entire system had moved to a point where change by reform was no longer possible. Not even an assertive ruler would by this time have been able to carry through the reforms Louis XVI actually intended to carry through. No matter what he attempted to do, he would always meet with the most severe resistance from all directions. From the court, the parlements (who actually defended their own privileges), even from the people as such (public opinion). Especially the parlements always knew how to mobilize public opinion against any reform. Even a theoretically absolute king wasn't able to introduce reforms without the support of the nation or his nobles etc..  The ancien regime was bound to collapse not because people were starving. This had always happened before and was going to happen afterwards. It was bound to collapse because "people" finally "realized" that the system, functioning as it did by now, with the different piviledged lobby groups always asserting their rights against each other,   would forever and permanently block reform. It had become part of the system. So if tehre could not be any kind of reform within this system, obviously, it was the system itself that had to go. Revolution was really inevitable (s. Norbert Elias).

So also Marie Antoinette was in the end only a scapegoat for the failures of the system. Even if she had led a totally modest life it wouldn't have changed the situation of the poor in any way. But she was certainly a symbol of the dekadent court and she paid the price for being this symbol, and not for having betrayed military information to the enemy, which the tribunal couldn't prove against her at the time.

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: ilyala on November 07, 2006, 02:12:12 AM
i think things could have changed, but not in the time of louis 16th. i think actually louis 15th was the key. he should have at least tried to promote able councilors and ministers and he should have tried to create some sort of a government. he didn't. and the numberless mistresses of course were a very bad mark on the monarchy.

i think that the fact that people were starving was a very important thing. yes, that alone, was probably not enough since indeed it had happened before, but it does change the perspective. you're hungry and your kids are hungry and you feel powerless. and then you see the queen dressed luxuriously and dancing and going to balls. you can't help but hate her.

the problem with louis and the parlement was that the parlement was controlled by rich people. one way, and the most efficient way i believe, to get the money, was to tax the rich. remember, the nobles were immune to taxes. again the starving people thought 'i have to give away my last money to the king while those nobles with lots of money give nothing'. the nobles and the clerics fought the king's attempt to tax them. they rejected it. the fact that this was possible was the problem. the fact that no-one had thought of reforming the parlement in a way the english one was reformed (i have no knowledge of a simmilar immunity among the english nobles - and we must remember the english civil war happened because the commons had enough power to oppose the king). no-one ever thought (or tried) to give the people a way to express themselves other than the always-outnumbered 3rd state. no wonder they got furious.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: RealAnastasia on November 09, 2006, 10:35:53 PM
Yes, "Toto" had a tragic life. And she almost fainted when she knew her husband, but later, she loved him, and, as Erik told you, she fighted along with him against Godoy's power. Her mother-in-law, Queen Maria Luisa, hated her.

 It seems that "Toto" was very intelligent. Sadly she died very young. It was never clear to me if she was a tubercular patient, but I suppose it was her condition...

RealAnastasia.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on November 10, 2006, 01:36:52 AM
Yes she was sickly when she came to Spain. When someone accused his mother & Godoy of posioning his wife. Ferdinand (who had every right to sling mud on his mother) said" That was an injustice, my poor wife came consumptive !".  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on November 10, 2006, 10:39:36 AM
In reply to Palatine, I shall answer only two of the points.
1. Just because Mazarin or so and so or such and such used foreign troops does not make it right. Any ruler who has to rely on foreign soldiers to shoot down and kill his/her own people to stay in power are no longer worthy of any loyalty and have abdicated the trust of their people. Had I been a Frenchman then I would have demanded justice also.
2. The Temple complex was an assortment of buildings, a mixture of medieval and more recent styles. Marie thought they were going to be sent to the relatively new palace that her brother in law had had built. She was shocked when she learned that they were being sent to the old medieval "tower" part of the complex. At first they were housed in the small tower until their prison could be readied in the large tower. My only error was in capitalizing the tower.
3. And to all who have posted that Louis XVI was under "duress" when he took the oath to the Constitution of 1790, I strongly disagree. He still had consideraly room to maneuver and could have chosen quite a few options without fear of his life or for that of his family. In fact at the large celebration held on the Field of Mars the royal family, including Marie, were cheered enthusiastically by the crowd. Instead, Louis chose to take the oath knowing full well he had no intention of keeping it and was working to undermine it. He could have easily taken the position that he could not support the constitution and refused to accept it. There was no threat of death, only abdication or de-thronement. Instead he chose the less honorable method, and he paid for his double dealing.
The only way Louis or Marie's actions can be justified is if you believe that they had the right to do anything to restore the old absolute monarchy which the French nation had just rejected by an overwhelming majority. Yes, what followed was tragic, but a lot of that can be blamed on the refusal of the king, queen and the ultra right to accept the verdict of the nation and try to work out a new system. I fully believe that the majority of the French people were more than ready to have a monarchy under Louis XVI that accepted limitation on autocracy, rights of the citizens, and a sharing of power between the king and his people.
If you accept that absolute monarchy is the only answer then, yes, Louis and Marie were "innocent" and thus absolved.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on November 11, 2006, 05:49:04 AM
Oh, dear... you are dreaming with your eyes open ! Your explanation would be valid should 1789-93 France be a true nation. Actually, it wasn't. The country was thorn into several factions and personal interests. All the king and queen could see was riots and bloodsheds. There was no more peace, since the power fell into factitiouses' hands.

So, naturally, the king, considering himself the father of his people, wanted to bring peace back. It was impossible with those different factions that could not even get along ! It was but anarchy. It is indeed more peace than absolute monarchy Louis wanted to restore.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Silja on November 11, 2006, 11:44:28 AM
In reply to Palatine, I shall answer only two of the points.

3. And to all who have posted that Louis XVI was under "duress" when he took the oath to the Constitution of 1790, I strongly disagree. He still had consideraly room to maneuver and could have chosen quite a few options without fear of his life or for that of his family. In fact at the large celebration held on the Field of Mars the royal family, including Marie, were cheered enthusiastically by the crowd. Instead, Louis chose to take the oath knowing full well he had no intention of keeping it and was working to undermine it. He could have easily taken the position that he could not support the constitution and refused to accept it. There was no threat of death, only abdication or de-thronement. Instead he chose the less honorable method, and he paid for his double dealing.


When the Parisians marched on Versailles in October 1789  Louis was indeed bullied into signing the constitution. I'd call that duress. Moreover, the royal family was subsequently taken to Paris by force. As a fe facto prisoner he was indeed under duress from then on.
In fact for a long time Louis XVI did not work against the constitution, which admittedly he did not wish to work because he did not share the ideas behind it. But he did attempt to comply with it in the beginning for reasons I mentioned above. The trouble was each time the king used his veto, which was GUARANTEED by the VERY CONSTITUTION, he was bullied over it. So in these cases, who  was it then who did not respect the constitution ????? When speaking of double dealing one must also call the assembly to account. The assembly had created a constitutional organ -  the executive (the king), with certain constitutional functions - which they would then prevent from executing these functions as the constitution demanded.
The assembly obviously mistrusted the king. But then they should have deposed the dynasty from the start and chosen another family to "rule" over them as constitutional monarchs. By giving Louis XVI some constitutional rights but then preventing him from executing these rights, the members of the assembly were being just as dishonest as the king.   
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on November 11, 2006, 12:54:18 PM
France, at peace, under Louis XVI! I am not the one dreaming. In 1774-1775, the first year of his reign, the harsh winter had led to one of the worst harvests in memory. In May, 1775, there was a scarcity of grain, and bread. The misguided reforms of the Controller General Turgot acerbated the situtation. Throughout France there were riots which became known as the Flour Wars. The rumor that the royal family was hoarding grain led five thousand people to storm the gates at Versailles. Turgot called out 25,000 troops to control the situtation, and ordered summary tribunals and hangings to set examples. This brutal response by Louis' government left a very bad taste in the mouths of the common people against the 'Father' the king.
Meanwhile, poor innocent Marie Antoinette was establishing an a la mode form of hair style called the pouf. This style called for the hair to be swept up in high, fantastic creations in which scenes were created of many variations. Her favorite modeste, Rose Bertin, even created a headdress called the coiffure a la revote. These wedding cake creations called for lots and lots of flour to powder. It was at this time that people began to associate Marie with callous disregard for the welfare of her people.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on November 11, 2006, 02:22:04 PM
At the beginning of the revolution Louis was not a prisoner, held with a gun to his head. He had many options and plenty of room to maneuver. Unfortunately, he always seemed to take the worst option, and to make the wrong decisions. Or, what is worse, to take no decision at all, to dither, until events forced his hand.
In October, 1789, the king had the choice of removing himself and the family to safety when the mob approached Versailles. He dithered until it was too late to leave. Louis was good a dithering. That was his fault, no one forced him to make the wrong decision.
Yes, he was forced to go live in Paris. That was probably a good thing. the whole concept of the monarchy at Versailles had become outdated and a encumberance to the monarchy. Even the aristocrats who profited so much by it held it as a travesty and a joke.
Was the king under "duress" when he came to live in Paris?
He lived at the Tuilleries, which after some refurbishment, was a decent accomodation. He had a living allowance of 25 million livres, plus the revenue of the royal estates. He had a court of 150 in which members of the nobility still held some of the old court offices, plus 700 plus servants to wait on him. He was allowed the Swiss Guard, and the National Guard had not yet become the king's enemy. It was still composed of sensible, well-educated bourgeoise who were not inimical to the monarchy. The family was allowed to go live at Saint Cloud during the summer heat. The king could continue to hunt in forest at Bellevue. The family could attend Mass. The little Dauphin was allowed to play daily in the garden, where huge crowds of Parisians came to watch him and show their affection for him. The king and queen paid several visits to some of the working class arrondisements, where they were cheered by loyal subject.
This was not duress, except in their own minds.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on November 11, 2006, 02:36:54 PM
Was the king under "duress"
On February 4, 1790, Louis, in a simple black suit, appeared before the National Assembly. He swore before them "to defend and maintain constitutional liberty, whose principles the general will, in accord with my own, has sanctioned." Bailey then responded for the Assembly that by this pledge "you will be Louis the Wise, Louis the Just, Louis the Good, you will truly be Louis le Grand."
Dosen't sound like he was under much duress then.
In July, 1790, the Fete de la Federation was held on the Champs de Mars. Although a heavy rain turned everything into a sodden mess, nevertheless on the Altar of the Nation were the words: The Nation, the Law, the King. the Nation, that is you. The Law, that is also you. The King, he is the guardian of the Law.
After Layfayette had administered the oath to assembled federes, Louis, using his new title of King of the French, swore "to employ all the power delegated to me by the consitution to uphold the decrees of the National Assembly." The Queen held up the Dauphin, and the whole area was rocked by loud and sustained cheers of "Long Live the King, Long Live the Queen." A month later the royal family would start their via dolorosa towards Varennes and forfeit the loyalty of many.
As for his vetoes causing the trouble, it wasn't until he vetoed the Civil Constitution of the Clergy that his use of the veto got him into trouble. And that was because, despite positive proof that the nation wanted this law, he obeyed the Pope and not the National Assembly. Here also he had a choice and he made a bad one.
I am not saying Louis and Marie were completely at fault, but neither were they innocent. It seems some would have us believe that they simply were bystanders caught up in the horrible mess, afraid for their lives, unable to do anything but suffer the slings and arrows of a cruel and hideous populace. This is not true. They were active participants in these events, and they made many bad choices which percipitated reactions against them.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on November 11, 2006, 03:58:21 PM
Was Marie an "innocent" victim?
In 1774, the year of their accession to the throne, France had a deficiet of 22 Million livres, due mainly to the disastrous Seven Years War. Within a short time the deficiet would grow to 78 millions.
In 1776, the queen had a yearly allowance of 120,000 livres to cover her clothing allowance. That year alone she spent 100,000 livres just on accessories. Louis relectantly paid the balance of the debt she ran up on clothes.
In 1775, the queen appointed her friend the Princess de Lamballe to the office of Surintendante de la Maison de la Reine (Steward of the Queen's  Household). She could draw a yearly salary of 150,000 livres. This post had been long since abolished but the queen badgered the king to re-establish it for the Lamballe.
The princess was very rich in her own right and certainly didn't need the income.
At no time during these actions was Marie Antoinette under any "duress" by the howling, ravaging mob to spend herself into debt and add to the burden of the royal treasury. Does "Madame Deficie" ring a bell.
So what, some will say, if she was extravagant? What harm could it do? In the minds of the people excessive spending of gorgeous toilettes, jewels, and furbelows was associated with the detested royal mistresses (such as Pompadour and Du Barry). These women had also mixed in politics, getting favorites appointed to royal offices. The queen had little political clout but her spending huge sums of grandiose adornment led the public to perceive that she did, like the royal mistresses. In the mind of the public began to grow the doubt that the queen was a willy female schemer trying to wrest political control away from the king. Her fashion follies were the beginning of a growing mistrust of her that led to more malicious and eventually hateful accusations against her.
In 1777 her brother Joseph II paid a visit to Versailles to assess the situation for their mother. Marie greeted him wearing one of her towering poufs adorned with a huge display of flowers and feathers. When asked by his sister how he liked her fashionable headdress the emperor replied with prophetic wit: "If you wish me to speak frankly, Madam, I must say I find it far too light to support a crown."
Even twelve years before the revolution thoughtful people were seeing Marie actions were leading to some
disaster. No, she was not "innocent."
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Silja on November 12, 2006, 11:02:58 AM

In October, 1789, the king had the choice of removing himself and the family to safety when the mob approached Versailles. He dithered until it was too late to leave. Louis was good a dithering. That was his fault, no one forced him to make the wrong decision.


No, very true no one forced him to make this decision, which was the wrong one with hindsight. But the king was repelled by the idea of flight at this moment because he thought it was his duty as king to remain at his post so to speak. 

Yes, he was forced to go live in Paris. That was probably a good thing. the whole concept of the monarchy at Versailles had become outdated and a encumberance to the monarchy. Even the aristocrats who profited so much by it held it as a travesty and a joke.
Was the king under "duress" when he came to live in Paris?
He lived at the Tuilleries, which after some refurbishment, was a decent accomodation. He had a living allowance of 25 million livres, plus the revenue of the royal estates. He had a court of 150 in which members of the nobility still held some of the old court offices, plus 700 plus servants to wait on him. He was allowed the Swiss Guard, and the National Guard had not yet become the king's enemy. It was still composed of sensible, well-educated bourgeoise who were not inimical to the monarchy. The family was allowed to go live at Saint Cloud during the summer heat. The king could continue to hunt in forest at Bellevue. The family could attend Mass. The little Dauphin was allowed to play daily in the garden, where huge crowds of Parisians came to watch him and show their affection for him. The king and queen paid several visits to some of the working class arrondisements, where they were cheered by loyal subject.
This was not duress, except in their own minds.

Whether the king's removal to Paris was a good or bad thing is beside the point as long as the king could not choose for himself. When the mob in the courtyard of the palace demanded the king's removal to the capital people were brandishing weapons and presenting the impaled heads of the guards recently murdered on their pikes.

Moreover, personal comfort at the Tuileries again has nothing to do with the political constraints he faced. He was a constitutional king whose constitutional rights were only respected as long as they coincided with the decisions of the assembly. If the assembly wanted an organ which would merely saction their decisions then they should indeed have either abolished the monarchy right away.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Silja on November 12, 2006, 11:47:25 AM
As for his vetoes causing the trouble, it wasn't until he vetoed the Civil Constitution of the Clergy that his use of the veto got him into trouble. And that was because, despite positive proof that the nation wanted this law, he obeyed the Pope and not the National Assembly. Here also he had a choice and he made a bad one.


"Between May and August of that year [1790], the constituent assembly  embarked on a wholesale reform of the French Church, promulgated as the Civil Constitution of the Clergy. Its provisions were extremely  radical: instead of being nominated as before, bishops and priests would now be elected by the laity. This opened up the prospect of Protestants, Jews and atheists participating in the election of the Catholic clergy. The pope was henceforth excluded from any part in episcopal appointments. Finally, in December the Assembly decided to impose an oath of support for the Civil Constitution on all the Church hierarchy. All who refused to do so were to be immediately replaced.
The action launched the first open battle between supporters and opponents of the Revolution. Almost half of the parish clergy and all but seven of the episcopate declined to take the oath. Instead, the latter rallied round the Exposition of Principles drafted by Archbishop Boisgelin of Aix, and signed by thirty of the bishops in the Assembly, giving their reasons for voting against the Civil COnstitution. On a wider scale, the 'non-juring' parish priests  who would not swear the oath and faced ejection generally had much support among their congregations. The issue of religion thus marked the beginning of popular counter-revolution" (Munro Price, The Road from Versailles, p. 112f.).

The enforcement of the Civil Constitution was an infringement on religious freedom and a de facto separation from Rome, which no convinced Catholic could have accepted. It was absolutely unthinkable that as a devout Catholic Louis XVI could sanction this law. It was a matter of conscience. By no means did the whole nation want this law. Louis XVI would surely reject a law which meant the complete reversal of the apostolic principle through the election of bishops and priests.
But even if it WAS the wrong decision to use his vetoe then, it was nevertheless STILL his RIGHT according to the constitution. So why have a constitution in the first place when it is not supposed to be complied with.

Louis XVI did sign in the end because he was well aware of the pressure. But it was from around this time when he began to seek an end to a  political situation which had become intolerable to him, that is, from then on he began to plan a counter-revolution.

So to a great deal the king's plans for counter-revolution  resulted from the double dealing, the questionable laws and questionable process of legislation on the part of the assembly.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on November 12, 2006, 12:42:23 PM
The King's veto was not absolute. It was only suspensive. And, being a "constitutional" monrach means just that. The king's personal views were immaterial. He was bound to act according to his government's wishes regardless of his own beliefs.  Unfortunately Louis, and Marie, couldn't accept that. As Abraham Lincoln said--revolutions never go backward. Yet Louis and Marie tried to turn the clock back and re-institute an absolute monarchy. This led to their botched flight to start the counter-revolution, and eventually to their fate. If Louis felt he couldn't live with the civil constitution then he could have abdicated in favor of his son, with his brother Provence as regent. This might well have saved the monarchy, and his and his family's life. Provence was no genius but he was the politically smartest of the brothers. It was the king and queen's determination to reimpose a form of monarchy on the people that they didn't want that led them to make tragic errors of judgement and action.
And even if the law or laws enacted by the Assembly were unjust they were the laws enacted by the representatives of the nation who had been elected by the nation. Louis wanted a government in which his will and his will alone counted and no one had elected him. It was his failure to see that this was no longer possible that led to all his troubles. That perhaps is the most tragic thing of all.
The whole point of this segment is to dicuss whether Marie Antoinette (and Louis XVI) were innocent and the victims of a cruel and unjust mob. My position is that they were not innocent, that their actions led to much of what happened. The revolution was not full born like an armed and armored Athena springing full grown from Zeus' forehead. It was a long road and along the way Louis and Marie could see many signs that warned "Danger if you go this way". If they had taken another path (acted in different ways) it would have led to different consequences. Louis and Marie were advised by many wise heads which if they had accepted and acted on that advice would have resulted in different events. Yet, they did not, and events unfolded. They must bare responsibility for their actions and bare blame for it. Yes, we are wise with our hindsight, but even at the time Louis and Marie were given plenty of warning that they were acting unswisely. I have great sympathy for Louis and while my sympathy for Marie Antoinette is much less I still find her a fascinating historical person, yet I do not enshire them as saints who were the innocent victims of an unholy blood thirsty people who ate aristocrats for breakfast.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Silja on November 12, 2006, 03:06:11 PM
The King's veto was not absolute. It was only suspensive. And, being a "constitutional" monrach means just that. The king's personal views were immaterial. He was bound to act according to his government's wishes regardless of his own beliefs. 


Yes, it was suspensive, but suspensive means that the law cannot be put into effect right away. Certainly Louis knew it was only a suspensive veto, but he was still not allowed to use it his suspensive veto freely. If the assembly wished the king (the executive) to only sanction their laws why did they give him the suspensive veto in the first place?

Moreover, whether a personal view or not, the infringement on religious freedom was a violation of the freedom of religion and thus a violation of the declaration of civil rights itself which had only recently been proclaimed by the Revolution


If Louis felt he couldn't live with the civil constitution then he could have abdicated in favor of his son, with his brother Provence as regent. This might well have saved the monarchy, and his and his family's life. Provence was no genius but he was the politically smartest of the brothers.

Actually both Prevence and Artois were a lot more conservative than Louis XVI in their attitude towards the Revolution. In fact Louis XVI  wrote to his brothers who had gone into exile not to interfere in the way they did because they were making his situation even more difficult by their anti-revolutionary dealings abroad. Provence had escaped France in 1791 and had established himself with his brother in Coblenz. Like his brother Artois he was rather fearful Louis XVI might arrive at some sort of compromise with the Revolution. There's no evidence he was in any way more sympathetic towards the Revolution than Louis XVI, quite the contrary!

Only after years of exile and after having ascended the throne decades later as Louis XVII, had he come to terms with the fact that he could only rule as a constitutional monarch. Unlike Artois he would then defend the constitutional system. Like Charles II, he did everything not to be sent packing again.


Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on November 12, 2006, 04:20:29 PM
We could continue to bat these issues back and forth, and probably never come to an agreement, just as historians still debate the Revolution. Therefore, we, at least I, will have to agree to disagree, respectfully. I believe that Marie Antoinette, and to a lesser extent Louis XVI, bear in a significant measure blame for the events that transpired. In other words, they were not innocent. You believe that the queen and Louis were innocent and that they were the victims of circumstances largely beyond their control. I can live with that.
It has been most stimulating debating with you. Thank you for not letting it descend into level of personal attack. I hope I have been as courteous.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Silja on November 13, 2006, 08:11:16 AM
We could continue to bat these issues back and forth, and probably never come to an agreement, just as historians still debate the Revolution. Therefore, we, at least I, will have to agree to disagree, respectfully. I believe that Marie Antoinette, and to a lesser extent Louis XVI, bear in a significant measure blame for the events that transpired. In other words, they were not innocent. You believe that the queen and Louis were innocent and that they were the victims of circumstances largely beyond their control. I can live with that.
It has been most stimulating debating with you. Thank you for not letting it descend into level of personal attack. I hope I have been as courteous.

Yes, to a large degree we will have to agree to disagree. But your're certainly right that Louis XVI and MA were not innocent. They surely must be held responsible for their actions. They might have made different decisions in the respective circumstances. At the same time though I also put considerable blame on the assembly/Revolutionary movement for the course of events, and that's where we differ in opinion.

I'm nevertheless curious to know why you have come to the conclusion that Provence might have been a suitable replacement for Louis XVI as constitutional king.

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: palatine on November 13, 2006, 10:32:55 AM
I have taken the liberty of editing James's post to have room for my reply.
1. Any ruler who has to rely on foreign soldiers to shoot down and kill his/her own people to stay in power are no longer worthy of any loyalty...
2. The Temple complex was an assortment of buildings...
3. ...He still had consideraly room to maneuver and could have chosen quite a few options without fear of his life or for that of his family... There was no threat of death, only abdication or de-thronement. 
The only way Louis or Marie's actions can be justified is if you believe that they had the right to do anything to restore the old absolute monarchy which the French nation had just rejected by an overwhelming majority....If you accept that absolute monarchy is the only answer then, yes, Louis and Marie were "innocent" and thus absolved.

1.  During the American Revolution, George Washington gave commands to foreigners while Benjamin Franklin persuaded Louis XVI to fund the war.  Both knew that their army would be fighting fellow Americans (called Loyalists or Tories) who sided with the British.  I don't think they did the wrong thing; per your logic, they were contemptible.   
        
2.  I wondered if perhaps you were trying to differentiate the royal prison from the Temple of Reason that the revolutionaries established at Notre-Dame Cathedral for the edification of the people, most of whom wanted no part of it.

3.  Louis could not have rejected the oath and retired into private life.  Louis was a prisoner in a gilded cage who understood that if he refused the oath, his family would die.  Thanks in part to negative propaganda, mobs that cheered Louis one day howled for blood the next; mobs were a real menace that the revolutionaries could not control or suppress.  I think Louis was trying to buy time to create a better bargaining position and to save his family when he gave the oath.  I don’t think anyone who faced the variables that he faced could have succeeded in creating order (of any kind) out of the ongoing chaos without securing military help or escaping the custody of the revolutionaries and the mobs.  The flight to Varennes was an attempt to find that better bargaining position, one that failed.  Louis and Marie Antoinette were well aware that leaders of the revolution changed frequently and that the revolutionaries were, to some degree, at the mercy of the mobs too.  This meant any deal they made or tried to make with the revolutionaries really wasn’t enforceable (on either side) since a deal made one day could change the next once a different group of revolutionaries seized power.  As Stanley Loomis explained in Paris in the Terror:

The French Revolution...was not a single, self-contained or unified uprising, but a succession of revolutions.  One after another, various men or parties emerged to seize power.  One after another, they were swept away by forces stronger than themselves.  So violent were those insurrections, so torrential the flow of events that today’s reader, like many people who lived through the time, often finds himself without bearings.”

In Legacy of Death, Barbara Levy noted that almost three thousand people were guillotined in Paris from 1789 to 1796 and that several thousand more died as a result of mob violence in the city.  She also reported that about twenty thousand people were guillotined, etc., in other parts of France during that time.  We can’t leapfrog from the Constitution to the gloire of Napoleon when we evaluate Marie Antoinette's actions; the horrible things that took place during the revolution were the context of her actions and must be considered.  Further, we really don’t know what Louis and/or Marie Antoinette would have done if they’d been successful.  Some of the reforms were things he’d wanted to do himself, things he’d been prevented from doing by the fear that the nobles would mount a rebellion.  Marie Antoinette's dormant political acumen came to the surface as the revolution lurched along; perhaps she would have cut deals with the revolutionaries once she was in a better bargaining position thanks, in part, to foreign troops.  We’ll never know.   

The issue at hand is whether Marie Antoinette was guilty of treason; absolute monarchy isn't on trial here.  If you reread my original post, you'll see that I didn't defend absolute monarchy, just her right to a fair trial.  In my opinion, when you consider her actions during the revolution, you must ask yourself three questions:   

First, was the French republic as it existed in 1789-93 a legitimate, representative, and stable government?

Second, should a reasonable person in Marie Antoinette’s shoes have shown loyalty to the people who were holding her and her family prisoner? 

Third, can you prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that she called on foreign rulers for troops in order to reestablish the absolute monarchy and not to save her life and those of her family and to simultaneously put the royals in a better bargaining position?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on November 13, 2006, 12:57:44 PM
For Silja, in reply to your question concerning the Comte de Provence.
On 17 Jyly, 1789, Louis went to Paris, upon the recommendation of members of his council, to show himself to the people. Before he left he made a will and a testament, and signed a decree which, in the case he did not return, gave Provence authority as Lieutenant General of the Kingdom (essentially regent and military dictator) to act for his son, the dauphin.
This to me indicates that Louis had some faith in his brother's ability. How much and to what extent I have no clue. Provence was, in my own opinion, the smartest of the three brothers. I recently read a new biography of him which showed he was much more capable than has previously been his image.
 He wouldn't have been king, only regent. The king would have been the little Louis Charles, Louis XVII, to whom the public showed much affection and attachment. Combined with this natural attraction for the boy and the traditional loyalty the nation felt for the monarchy, Provence may well have been able to stear a course that would have resulted in the survival of a constitutional monarchy. I think he could have compromised with the revolution that his brother seemed unable to do. Nor would he have had the baggage of Marie Antoinette hanging around his neck. In other words, it might have been a fresh start.
Then again, maybe not. It is all speculation which is ultimately futile, but so very interesting. Thank you for asking.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on November 13, 2006, 01:26:14 PM
In answer to Palatine:
Yes, the republic, which by the way, did not exist in 1789, was legitimate. It was the natural evolution from the Estates General which the king himself had called in that year. The laws that emerged and the consititution were the freely enacted legislation of the representatives of the nation, freely elected, and to which the king himself had freely swore to uphold, as I have pointed out. The republic that evolved after the king's dethronement in 1792 was also an enactment of the people, not a coup d'etat.
That the situtation devolved into the hideous excess of the Committee of Public Safety was not the will of the nation. It was the hijacking of the process by a group of radicals. And, this Reign of Terror as it is called, only lasted for a fraction of the years between the calling of the Estates General and the establishment of the Empire in 1804. While it holds our attention the most it is not representative of the revolutionary movement as a whole. This government which you persist on questioning its legitimacy was a legal as the monarchy which rested not on the will of the people but on long outdated feudal voodoo. When the king "legitimately" called the Estates General into session, the delegates, again freely elected by the people, decided to make changes. These delegates included the clergy, the nobility and the third estate (everybody else) and the vast majority wanted change, change, change, and they made them. Just because the king didn't like those changes doesn't mean anything.
I almost didn't respond to your first item, as it is too ridiculous, but I shall attempt it on reflection. The foreigners that came to side with the rebels in the American Revolution were, for the most part, not put in command of troops but were used to train and set up a professional army. The few who did hold command of fighting troops never went up against the Tory loyalist. And, yes, if George Washington had used the French soldiers who came to aid the Americans to attack American loyalists and shoot them and kill them, he would have been contemptible. You are beating a dead horse here trying to defend Louis and Maire on relying on foreign intervention to restore their authority. Even if they had been able to do so, how long do you think they would have lasted having to sit on their thrones held up by foreign bayonets?
Marie Antoinette herself wrote in a letter to a friend that she brought bad luck with her. She was right. She was bad luck from the day she arrived in France, but her actions as dauphine and queen often helped that bad luck along.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on November 13, 2006, 01:45:42 PM
Those paintings of Marie Antoinette done after 1781 are what we would call today "touched up."  After the birth of her son Louis Josephe in 1781, large chunks of her reddish blond hair fell out and grew back in only partially. Also the "frizzling" required to achieve the elaborate poufs the a la mode wore  eventually caused bald spots on the queen's head which had to be hiddden by 'falls' or false hair. After she turned thirty the queen abandoned these elaborate hairstyles in favor of a more economical style, in large part because her sparse hair could no longer support them. And her bust size increased after motherhood to a size forty four. She had to have some serious lacing done in order to achieve the slim silouette fashion demanded. Her nautral complexion was also fading. The young dames of her retinue were ordered to never stand next to a window where the natural light could show up the youthful hue of their complexions. When one young dame of honor forgot and did so, the queen fiercely scolded her in a jealous outburst.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eddie_uk on November 13, 2006, 01:48:19 PM
Reference please?

Thank you.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on November 13, 2006, 02:08:55 PM
An excellent book, newly published, entitled Queen of Fashion: What Marie Antoinette Wore to the Revolution. by Charlotte Weber.
The story concerning the young dames complexions comes from the Marquise de La Tour du Pin and Madame Campan.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eddie_uk on November 13, 2006, 02:12:57 PM
Thank you very much, will try and get a copy!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: ilyala on November 14, 2006, 02:01:59 AM
In answer to Palatine:
Yes, the republic, which by the way, did not exist in 1789, was legitimate. It was the natural evolution from the Estates General which the king himself had called in that year. The laws that emerged and the consititution were the freely enacted legislation of the representatives of the nation, freely elected, and to which the king himself had freely swore to uphold, as I have pointed out. The republic that evolved after the king's dethronement in 1792 was also an enactment of the people, not a coup d'etat.
That the situtation devolved into the hideous excess of the Committee of Public Safety was not the will of the nation. It was the hijacking of the process by a group of radicals. And, this Reign of Terror as it is called, only lasted for a fraction of the years between the calling of the Estates General and the establishment of the Empire in 1804. While it holds our attention the most it is not representative of the revolutionary movement as a whole. This government which you persist on questioning its legitimacy was a legal as the monarchy which rested not on the will of the people but on long outdated feudal voodoo. When the king "legitimately" called the Estates General into session, the delegates, again freely elected by the people, decided to make changes. These delegates included the clergy, the nobility and the third estate (everybody else) and the vast majority wanted change, change, change, and they made them. Just because the king didn't like those changes doesn't mean anything.
I almost didn't respond to your first item, as it is too ridiculous, but I shall attempt it on reflection. The foreigners that came to side with the rebels in the American Revolution were, for the most part, not put in command of troops but were used to train and set up a professional army. The few who did hold command of fighting troops never went up against the Tory loyalist. And, yes, if George Washington had used the French soldiers who came to aid the Americans to attack American loyalists and shoot them and kill them, he would have been contemptible. You are beating a dead horse here trying to defend Louis and Maire on relying on foreign intervention to restore their authority. Even if they had been able to do so, how long do you think they would have lasted having to sit on their thrones held up by foreign bayonets?
Marie Antoinette herself wrote in a letter to a friend that she brought bad luck with her. She was right. She was bad luck from the day she arrived in France, but her actions as dauphine and queen often helped that bad luck along.

in your opinion, would any other queen have managed to prevent the revolution?

i personally think not. i think she made things worse, but the revolution would have happened anyway. and the history is written by the winners. therefore no-one mentions the countless revolutions that didn't work out, and no-one blaims the kings that ruled in those revolutions as bad kings or as traitors.

no-one called philip 2nd of spain a traitor because he fought against the dutch when they rebelled against him (although the dutch were his people, theoretically, he as sovereign should have taken care of them). . no-one calls the hannoverian kings of england traitors because they fought against the jacobites. no-one called henry 8th of england a traitor, no-one called mary tudor a traitor in the religious wars where english were fighting english. no-one called abraham lincoln a traitor because he raised an army against the southern colonies.

because they won. had they lost, all these people would have faced much scrutiny from history and they would have come up as bad rulers, as bad people, and some of them probably as traitors and gold-digging people who wanted to rule for love of power or money. but they won, so no-one talks about their guilt or innocence. and as they won, they did what had to be done to win. and sometimes what had to be done was not right.

we cannot call marie antoinette a traitor. that would require her actively and knowingly going against france. she didn't. she was frivolous, maybe not extremely bright, had no political sense and she naively believed that she could win everyone over with her charm. a bad and wasting queen if you want (wasting finances). as i said, had she been the wife of a strong monarch she would have made him stronger by looking good at his side. unfortunatly she wasnt. but traitor is a bit too much.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Baby_Julia on November 14, 2006, 01:07:21 PM
There's nothing which i could add, just that it's a shame that she never had the opportunity to develop her character. I think she would have been a different queen if Maria Theresia would have spend more time on her education. She surely had the ability to be a better queen but if there's no one who feed your mind it will starve, you know what i mean??
so i don't think she was a traitor, i mean she was also a mother and was trying to protect her children. unfortunately the 17th century didn't allow the people to get a real impression of their king and queen. she was living in a golden cage.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Silja on November 15, 2006, 10:50:26 AM
For Silja, in reply to your question concerning the Comte de Provence.
On 17 Jyly, 1789, Louis went to Paris, upon the recommendation of members of his council, to show himself to the people. Before he left he made a will and a testament, and signed a decree which, in the case he did not return, gave Provence authority as Lieutenant General of the Kingdom (essentially regent and military dictator) to act for his son, the dauphin.
This to me indicates that Louis had some faith in his brother's ability.

But I don't think such a decree might necessarily tell us anything about Louis's potential faith in his brother's abilities because in the case of the king's death Provence might just have been the natural choice for regent because he was the next in line after the king's son. Marie Antoinette might have been the other possible choice, but the king would have been well aware of her unpopularity.


Provence may well have been able to stear a course that would have resulted in the survival of a constitutional monarchy. I think he could have compromised with the revolution that his brother seemed unable to do.

I haven't read this new biography, so I don't know what the author has to say about this issue. But to me your conclusions don't sound convincing because from what I've read all the evidence points to precisely the opposite. Before and immediately after the Revolution Provence appears to be much more conservative in his attitudes and reactions to the Revolution and its developments than Louis XVI.

In his admittedly rather dated book about Marie Thérèse André Castelot, too, describes how after Madame Royale's release from the Temple prison and arrival in Austria, Provence's initially pretty conservative attitudes become increasingly more liberal. I think Provence's change of mind   resulted from his experience in exile and from the acknowledgement that the clock couldn't be turned back any more.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on November 15, 2006, 01:12:32 PM
We can never know, of course, how it would have turned out if Provence had become Lt. Gen. and acted for his young nephew. It is all just a guess. I have no brief to defend Provence. He was conservative and defended the old absolute monarchy. He may well have been an abject failure and ended up on the guillotine. But, playing the what if game, I will venture a few supositions. Artois was detested by the people for a number of good reasons. That is why he had to flee at the very beginning of the revolution whereas Louis, Elizabeth and Provence could stay. Marie Antoinette would never have been considered for the post of regent for her son. Her unpopularity and her foreigner status would have made it almost impossible for the Assembly to agree to her. All of the family were firmly committed to an eventual restoration of the old monarchy. Louis and Marie however did try to work with the more moderate men like Mirabeau and Barnave and others in the hopes of steering the course of events, always with the purpose of maintaining the king's authority. Provence did also. I believe he would have been more successful at it than Louis was because 1. he didn't have the same baggage hanging around his neck that Louis and Marie had, 2. He was smarter and more resolute than his brother (Provence once remarked that trying to get Louis to hold to a position was like trying to hold greased billiard balls together), and 3. he showed when he did become king that he could compromise and still maintain his authority. His reign as Louis XVIII was the only successful one of the last three Bourbons, and he enjoyed a measure of popularity if not love from the people, and 4. He seemed to be lucky. Luck was something that seemed to elude his siblings.
As I say we will never know for sure.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Silja on November 17, 2006, 12:27:23 PM
Louis and Marie however did try to work with the more moderate men like Mirabeau and Barnave and others in the hopes of steering the course of events, always with the purpose of maintaining the king's authority.

In fact I think Louis XVI's greatest failure was to refuse proper cooperation with people like Mirabeau, Lafayette and Barnave. These were the champions of a constitutional monarchy who would always defend Louis's rights it seemed.

2. He was smarter and more resolute than his brother

He was definitely more resolute than his brother, but I wouldn't necessarily think he was smarter. Louis was much more intelligent than many thought. His actions were mostly not the result of stupidity but of ideology. But I haven't read enough about Provence to really decide. Provence was definitely quite ambitious. He had always craved his brother's throne, and while in Coblenz he was most eager to assume the regency, even while his brother was still alive. He also had no scruples to use Marie Therese as a political asset.


3. he showed when he did become king that he could compromise and still maintain his authority. His reign as Louis XVIII was the only successful one of the last three Bourbons, and he enjoyed a measure of popularity if not love from the people, and 4. He seemed to be lucky. Luck was something that seemed to elude his siblings.
As I say we will never know for sure.

 But I think also Louis XVI would finally have compromised with the Revolution if the flight to Montmercy had been successful and the king become free to bargain freely. This is also all conjecture of course, but I think the attitudes displayed in his letters to his brothers and his general conviction that you couldn't impose a government on a people by force suggest as much.

According to Castelot, and you may know more about this, having read the new biography, Louis XVIII wasn't entirely successful in his reign in that he already had to make quite some concessions to the reactionary faction at court lead mainly led by Artois.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Baby_Julia on February 10, 2007, 03:58:47 PM
(http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l241/Julietta_22/galerielettrema1.jpg)

what do you think she wrote in this letter??? Nobody was ever able to find out if it was about her relationship with Fersen or something political.

i just want to hear your opinion. thx
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on February 11, 2007, 07:44:50 PM
The words looked too small... :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James_Davidov on February 12, 2007, 03:25:28 AM
In regard to the initial point of this thread…

I’m sure I read that MA was shy and would bath in a gown and undress in private.  Also in regards to giving birth in public, I read that after her first child, she found the experience so traumatic that she broke with etiquette and never did it again. . . one in many changes she insisted upon.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on February 12, 2007, 03:48:37 AM
Yes...That provided more problems. As now the opposition said her son wasn't hers... :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on February 13, 2007, 11:36:59 AM
Interesting question about Marie Antoinette's letters... Nobody could read these crossed out lines... Romantical people think these could be love words, but more serious scholars, such as Nesta Webster, say that they were political passages, or maybe comments about the king's health, or even Fersen's.

I don't think these were tender words. There also are crossed out lines in letters Marie Antoinette sent to Mme de Fitz James. Did Marie Antoinette write love words to Mme de Fitz James ?  ;D
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on February 13, 2007, 07:59:55 PM
She was accused to be a loose woman with men and a lesbian...A huge plate of vices were attributed to her.  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James_Davidov on February 13, 2007, 08:47:50 PM
Completely.  I read in a biography that early during her reign, her acts of grace and compassion were celebrated on souvenirs; I recall that while travelling, I think from Fontainebleau, she spotted a disabled peasant walking along the road; she evidentially ordered her carriage to halt and allowed the man to travel in her carriage.  Whether this story was the polar opposite of the kind of propaganda that was distributed about her later in her life is unknown, but it  highlights how even in the 1700’s a public figures reputation was only as positive as one was willing to slander against. . . .

James

ps: ironic that Fresen succumbed to the ignorant wrath of public opinion also!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on February 13, 2007, 10:53:56 PM
Well...Fersen was a foreigner.  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James_Davidov on February 13, 2007, 11:20:21 PM
I was referring to his lynching at the funeral of the Swedish crown prince, whom it was falsely rumoured he had poisoned. . . .despite being viewed favourably by many in his class, the Swedish population hated him.

xJames

Ps: I think I’m referring to the right Count Fersen, they’ve been many . .  some of his ancestors caused just as much scandal!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on February 14, 2007, 03:10:27 AM
I think he died rather romantically like his adored queen...horribily at the hands of the public.  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Imperial.Opal on February 14, 2007, 03:45:52 AM
 I recently read a newspaper article regarding the new movie on MA, it mentioned that the 1950's film actress the late Jayne Mansfield and Marie Antoinette had one thing in common of all things, their bosoms- size, this is the first time I have heard of this. fact,fiction or rubbish
Ironically Jayne Mansfiield and Marie Antoinette did have  something in common, they both lost their heads,  Jayne in a tragic car accident in which she was decapitated in the 1960's ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on February 14, 2007, 03:58:36 AM
Marie Antoinette later did became serious unlikel Ms Mansfield who remained in her image. The latest blonde to go is Anna Nicole Smith. I think one day a film will be made about her life. I think her tragedy was more similar to Marilyn & Jayne.  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James_Davidov on February 14, 2007, 04:28:53 AM
I thought Jayne Mansfield had a giant bust, whilst MA was qrather petite...I dont recall anything written about her huge bust size, naturally one would presume it would have become a facit of pop culture.... I think teh only thing i ever read was that her breats were a basis for a style of wine glass, however this has been disproved.

xx
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on February 14, 2007, 06:35:29 AM
Quote
I think he died rather romantically like his adored queen...horribily at the hands of the public.

I would rather say he died like princess de Lamballe, slaughtered by a furious mob, both of them.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on February 14, 2007, 06:39:20 AM
Quote
I thought Jayne Mansfield had a giant bust, whilst MA was qrather petite

Actually, from Mme Elofe's measurements, Marie Antoinette's milliner, Marie Antoinette had 109 for bust and 58 for waist. That is to say a very thin waist for... hum... a very large bosom !  ::)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on February 14, 2007, 10:16:33 PM
MA was very elegant and royal. I think Ms Manfield is more like Countess Du Barry in style and form. Countary from the film, she was a very big-hearted woman and reconciled with MA during the revolution.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on February 15, 2007, 10:35:19 AM
You're right ! Mme du Barry was a very interesting person !
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: imperial angel on February 15, 2007, 11:46:03 AM
I recently read a newspaper article regarding the new movie on MA, it mentioned that the 1950's film actress the late Jayne Mansfield and Marie Antoinette had one thing in common of all things, their bosoms- size, this is the first time I have heard of this. fact,fiction or rubbish
Ironically Jayne Mansfiield and Marie Antoinette did have  something in common, they both lost their heads,  Jayne in a tragic car accident in which she was decapitated in the 1960's ;)

Sounds not very accurate to me. I think that Jayne Mansfield and Marie Antoinette didn't have too much in common, besides the fact they were unhappy glamorous women who led tragically short lives, but apart from that, I can't see one thing they had in common besides the heads of course). Way off topic, but I think you can see the the things Anna Nichole Smith and Jayne Mansfield had in common. ;) I agree, Jayne Mansfield was more like the Comtesse Du Barry than not, and as well, Marie Antoinette would have been horrified at being compared to her. She tried to be refined, whereas, Jayne Mansfield was scarcely that. ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Imperial.Opal on February 15, 2007, 07:53:50 PM
  I agree, Marie Antoinette would be offended  by this newspaper trash ,as she was by the vile attaks against her during  lifetime by the parisian and foreign press.  I am always dubious what I read and watch on the media today. ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on February 15, 2007, 08:29:02 PM
I do think she was proud of her breasts. She had the Royal porcelain factory of Serves created a series of "breast cups" modelled on her breasts.  ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: imperial angel on February 16, 2007, 01:49:01 PM
How far before the Revolution was that? In my opinion, MA was not so much proud of anything, as she had this thinking she was the best, and set apart, but that was because she was uninformed.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on February 16, 2007, 02:34:02 PM
Please don't blame it all on the "media." The scurillous attacks on Marie Antoinette didn't generate in the yellow rags of that day. They began in the bosom (sorry, but the posts on her breasts brought that to mind) of her own family. Her aunts (the daughters of Louis XV), her brother-in-laws and her cousin by marriage, and members of the court of the highest nobility in the land, all began to pass around snickering gossip and lewd remarks about her. Only later were these systemized and printed up in the ubiquitious pamphlets that circulated.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James_Davidov on February 16, 2007, 04:49:09 PM
Agreed.....nearlly any king or queen of the last few centuries, who did not have the support of their nobility, was in a dire situation....generally speaking.

xx
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: imperial angel on February 16, 2007, 05:31:02 PM
Well, I'm not sure that MA was supported by anybody, that I know of. History has given her a harsh verdict, as did her own times.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Alixz on February 19, 2007, 12:13:20 AM
Just a note on Jayne Mansfield.  Her daughter is the actress Marishka Hargatay, who plays Olivia Benson on Law and Oder - SVU .  Also Marishka and her younger brother were in the car in the back seat when the accident took place.

What trauma for two very young children.

But then Marie Antoinette's children suffered trauma after she and her husband were deposed as did Alexandra's children in Yekaterinburg.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on February 19, 2007, 02:05:52 AM
When she became Queen in 1774 she was given a "state" entry into Paris. As she stood on the balcony of the Tuilleries Palace the garden and Louis XV Square were black with peole cheering her name to the heavens. The mayor of Paris (I think it was) remarked to her that today all Paris were her slaves. One has to ask why just eighteen years later she had to flee from that same palace with the same people howling for her death.
I would submit for consideration that Alexandra's children had it realatively easy in Ekaterinburg compared to what Marie Antoinette's children suffered. None of them were taken away from their mother, beaten on whim, made to learn filthy language to refer to their parents, or testify in court that their mother had sexually abused them, had to be walled up in a room to rot in their own filth and die from neglect of their medical condition. None of them spent years in a cell, alone, wondering what had happened to their parents, not knowing what was going to happen to them being the interest of unknown men who came to inspect them on unannounced occasion. No, getting three good meals a day, being allowed to exercise in the garden, having five  servants and a doctor to wait on them,  having the company of their parents, and being allowed to have mass said for them, no , that was a picnic compared to the French royal children.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on February 19, 2007, 08:38:59 AM
Yes...But Madame Royale survived to tell the tale, while the whole Russian Imperial family died... :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Alixz on February 19, 2007, 10:33:49 AM
The level of trauma was indeed different. 

The French Royal children were treated despicably.

The mention of the trauma of the children of all three ladies was meant only as another example of the similarity between them.

Not having any other example to compare it to, I would think that the children of Alexandra felt their trauma deeply and with no less private pain.  Their physical pain was obviously less and as long as they remained with their parents, they felt themselves lucky.  Did they fear they might ultimately be executed?  As in other threads, we have noted that we can not tell.  We have no notes or diaries that tell us so.

Not even Alexandra's, which is here I would have thought we would find it.

The French Royal children must have feared death daily.  How awful.  Just one more example of "man's inhumanity to man" and to those less able to defend themselves such a children.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on February 19, 2007, 11:40:52 AM
One reason that little Louis Charles was treated so much differently than his sister might have been due to the rumors about his parentage. Madame Royale was undoubtedly the daughter of Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette. She was indeed a Child of France. There were many however who were willing to believe that Louis Charles was illegitmate, the result of a love affair between Marie Antoinette and Axel Fersen. Thus he was only half royal. Even his own uncle, Louis XVIII seemed to be strangely unresponsive to this boy. When he returned as king he made a great show of exhuming the remains of his brother and sister-in-law and burying them in the royal crypt at St. Denis. But, although the site of the grave was well known, he made no effort to exhume his nephew's body and rebury it.
I am not sure the dates match about Fersen's access to the queen and the birth of the boy. I would have to do some research on it. The DNA tests on the boy's heart proved he was indeed the son of Marie Antoinette but I don't think any test were done to establish paternity. Another missed opportunity.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: imperial angel on February 20, 2007, 08:44:27 AM
It is a good point about the trauma to MA's children. They were not treated well. But, the French Revolution took place in an earlier time and country, and perhaps in a more brutal frame of mind in regards to the royal family than Russia. It was the 18th century in France, and the royal family was widely hated. This is versus the 20th century in Russia where I know the Imperial Family wasn't liked, but I don't know if they were as widely hated. I think the hate tended to center around Alexandra in particular and of course Nicholas, but I think the children weren't blamed. Whereas in France, I think the children were. This could because by the 20th century, the role of teenagers and young adults as otmaa were, was seen as different than in the 18th century It was easy to see them as being more responsible and less innocent, so I think how they were treated reflects in the differences in eras between these two events, perhaps. That's just my theory.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: ilyala on February 23, 2007, 12:29:18 AM
One reason that little Louis Charles was treated so much differently than his sister might have been due to the rumors about his parentage. Madame Royale was undoubtedly the daughter of Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette. She was indeed a Child of France. There were many however who were willing to believe that Louis Charles was illegitmate, the result of a love affair between Marie Antoinette and Axel Fersen. Thus he was only half royal. Even his own uncle, Louis XVIII seemed to be strangely unresponsive to this boy. When he returned as king he made a great show of exhuming the remains of his brother and sister-in-law and burying them in the royal crypt at St. Denis. But, although the site of the grave was well known, he made no effort to exhume his nephew's body and rebury it.
I am not sure the dates match about Fersen's access to the queen and the birth of the boy. I would have to do some research on it. The DNA tests on the boy's heart proved he was indeed the son of Marie Antoinette but I don't think any test were done to establish paternity. Another missed opportunity.

marie therese and louis joseph (the first dauphin) were born before fersen came back to the court from fighting in the american revolution (on the american side). louis charles and his little sister sophie (who died at 9 months old) were born after he did.

however, there were rumours even on louis joseph's paternity. a courtier named lauzun, i believe was suspected of being his father.

i believe this shows a pattern of behaviour that i think issues mainly from louis xviii who wanted to be king and tried to get there by discrediting his nephews.

as a side note, one can't help but notice the difference between the two dauphins, the sickly louis-joseph and the 'healthy as a peasant boy' (i believe marie antoinette stated something of that sort) louis-charles. that doesn't necessarily mean they had different fathers, but if you are inclined to believe that, you could also use the 'new blood' (of fersen or someone else) as an argument for louis-charles' health, as opposed to the massive inbreeding that affected louis-joseph.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on February 23, 2007, 01:18:00 AM
Indeed...The timing of Louis Charles's birth made Fersen a suspect being the father. However no question about Madame Royale's birth.  ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: pers on February 23, 2007, 07:55:32 AM
Please bear in mind that contraception was widely practiced in those days by the nobility.  Axel de Fersen was a real man for the ladies and had a string of mistresses.  So you can be assured that he in all probability would have used condoms when having sex.  So assuming he had sexual relations with Marie Antoinette, I think he would have seen to it to take care of the situation...
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: ilyala on February 23, 2007, 08:19:29 AM
Please bear in mind that contraception was widely practiced in those days by the nobility.  Axel de Fersen was a real man for the ladies and had a string of mistresses.  So you can be assured that he in all probability would have used condoms when having sex.  So assuming he had sexual relations with Marie Antoinette, I think he would have seen to it to take care of the situation...

i'm not sure how widespread contraception was among 'honourable' women. after all, marie's own friend, madame de polignac, had a child while her husband was away (and he couldn't have possibly been the father, no matter how you looked at it). had contraception been so widely practiced, i'm sure she would have rather used it.

not that i believe louis charles was the son of fersen. it's not even proven that fersen and marie antoinette slept together.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on February 23, 2007, 11:35:22 AM
Yes, that will be one of history's great mysteries.
I just found it strange that Louis XVIII went to so much trouble to exhume the "supposed" remains of his brother and sister-in-law and rebury them in the royal crypt at St. Denis, and had a chapel expiatoire built over the site of their graves (a lovey little monument in Paris today) but did absolutely nothing similiar for his nephew. Why? It would seem to me that reburial of the little boy's body would have been a great "photo op" for the restored monarchy, and confirmed the continuation of the royal line. Possible reasons:

1. the rumor that the child wasn't the king's (Louis XVI)
2. pique that the child got on the stand and accused his mother and aunt of deviant practices. This was a way to "punish" him.
3. that the body in the grave wasn't the real Louis Charles. Madame Royale and King Louis XVIII knew he had been spirited away. They feared that any mention of him might possibly bring out the real dauphin who would claim the throne.
4. just sheer indifference to the child. I don't think that in 1816/1817 he had become the iconic figure he was to become later in history.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on February 23, 2007, 07:59:54 PM
Yes...Louis XVIII did have doubts about his nephew being the son of his brother. His actions speak louder than words here.  ???
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: ilyala on February 24, 2007, 01:30:06 AM
Yes, that will be one of history's great mysteries.
I just found it strange that Louis XVIII went to so much trouble to exhume the "supposed" remains of his brother and sister-in-law and rebury them in the royal crypt at St. Denis, and had a chapel expiatoire built over the site of their graves (a lovey little monument in Paris today) but did absolutely nothing similiar for his nephew. Why? It would seem to me that reburial of the little boy's body would have been a great "photo op" for the restored monarchy, and confirmed the continuation of the royal line. Possible reasons:

1. the rumor that the child wasn't the king's (Louis XVI)
2. pique that the child got on the stand and accused his mother and aunt of deviant practices. This was a way to "punish" him.
3. that the body in the grave wasn't the real Louis Charles. Madame Royale and King Louis XVIII knew he had been spirited away. They feared that any mention of him might possibly bring out the real dauphin who would claim the throne.
4. just sheer indifference to the child. I don't think that in 1816/1817 he had become the iconic figure he was to become later in history.

i think it's either 2 or 4. i don't think anyone could have been sure of the child's paternity either way and i am pretty certain louis died in the tower.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on February 25, 2007, 07:45:10 PM
I don't think they will disturb his bones again... :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on February 26, 2007, 10:37:53 AM
The testing of DNA from the heart of the young king was in the news quite a bit last year. Anyone know why they only tested for maternal DNA from hairs of Marie Antoinette? Were there no DNA samples available from Louis XVI that could be tested for paternal DNA? I tried to follow the story but I admit I didn't follow it as closely as all that. Anyone have some good insights on this testing and controversy?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: lori_c on February 26, 2007, 10:58:07 AM
i have an insight but no documentation (try not to be too harsh James) in front of me to quote, I will post it later.  However, when the Bourbons dug up the mass grave to find the imperial couple, there wasn't much.  They took a couple of bones BELIEVED to be Louis XVI and some "grayish matter w/a woman's corset" BELIEVED to be MA.  So they had to rely on Mitochondrial DNA from the only proven source they had which was the hair in Austria.

I asked the same question about paternal DNA as well.  Also, I believe since there was only bone left w/no head where the pulp of the teeth in the skull are rich in DNA. the only DNA that could be relied upon is Mitochondrial (which passes from mother to daughter forever unchanged). :)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on February 26, 2007, 12:30:32 PM
Thanks. I would like to see the material that you have on this subject. So I will indeed await your posting of the documentation. It should be interesting, so I appreciate your response.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on February 26, 2007, 07:02:12 PM
I don't think the French wanted to go that avenue. I do not think the French Royal Family would have co-operated with such a DNA test (to dertemine if Louis Charles was Louis XVI's son).  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: lori_c on February 27, 2007, 08:58:59 AM
Well, the heart had changed hands so many times.  They were willing to do nuclear DNA testing.  They just couldn't be sure the bones from the grave are absolutely proven to be the King's. (or the Queen's for that matter) After all, it was a mass grave. Furthermore, nuclear DNA is harder to obtain from bones, especially old bones.  Mitochondrial DNA was the best route to prove that he was at least a child of the Queen.

But I STILL would love it if they could positively identify the King and Queen at St. Denis. How macambre, I know but curiosity...... :-\
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: James1941 on February 27, 2007, 11:42:01 AM
I am probably going to show my complete ignorance about DNA now, but...It is my understanding that the DNA of the prince came from shavings taken from his petrified heart and this was compared to DNA taken from hair samples of Marie Antoinette. Are there no hair samples of Louis XVI available? Or can paternal DNA not be obtained that way?
I think Eric_Lowe is probably correct in that the authorities didn't want to open up this can of worms. It was supposed to be a time of healing old wounds and making amends for the treatment of the boy, so just prove he was the little prince and leave it at that.
Still, it would be nice to have this mystery cleared up, or at least as much as can be cleared up.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: lori_c on February 27, 2007, 12:50:25 PM
I am no scientist, nor do I profess to be.  But DNA from hair has to come from the follicle close to the head. Like some that fell out, pulled out, not just cut.  And according to most of what I have read, the heads of the couple weren't recoverd and everything related to them were destroyed by mobs of revolutionaries.
But I am open to correction, I have no scientific degree.

I do know that mitochondrial DNA remains unchanged and is easier to obtain from older relics. 

The authorities would have gone to the graves first if they were sure the bones were accurate.  They are BELIEVED to be the real deal.  But you are correct in saying that what's the point when they had enough information with the Austiran hair to establish maternity w/Marie Antioinette. I totally agree w/both you and Eric. Enough is enough.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on February 27, 2007, 08:07:55 PM
Thanks ! Amen to that.  ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: veu-1 on April 09, 2007, 02:03:56 PM
(http://architecture.relig.free.fr/images/denis/mobilier_orants.jpg)

(http://www.herodote.net/Images/MarieAntoinette.jpg)

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/de/thumb/e/ea/Hinrichtung_marie_antoinette.jpg/300px-Hinrichtung_marie_antoinette.jpg)

(http://bpun.unine.ch/icono/JPG01/A3135.25.jpg)

(http://bpun.unine.ch/icono/JPG03/ZR270.17.jpg)

(http://www.polygraphicum.de/Portraitgraphik-MarieAntoinette-30.jpg)

(http://www.montana.edu/wwwvr/activities/activities04/images/Antoinettelg.jpg)

(http://portrait.kaar.at/FrRev1/images/marie_antoinette.jpg[img])http://www.historycentral.com/WH1400-1900/Biographies/Antoinette.jpg[/img]

(http://axelvonfersen.free.fr/portrait-marie.gif)

(http://www.galeon.com/home3/huniver22/antonieta.jpg)

(http://www.batguano.com/MAe.jpg)

(http://www.batguano.com/MAe.jpg)

(http://www.batguano.com/marie81.jpg)

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/02/Marie-Antoinette%3B_koningin_der_Fransen.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: veu-1 on April 09, 2007, 02:05:37 PM
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/nl/1/13/Marie-Antoinette-buste.jpg)

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d0/Koningin_marie-antoinette.jpg)

(http://nla.gov.au/nla.pic-an9288369-v.jpg)

(http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a382/KatinkaLafave/Marie-antoinette.jpg)

(http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a382/KatinkaLafave/MarienachderGeburtderKinder.jpg)

(http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a382/KatinkaLafave/marieant.jpg)

(http://www.amuletum.com/images/St221-1Ritr.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: veu-1 on April 09, 2007, 02:11:00 PM
(http://z.about.com/d/womenshistory/1/0/I/B/marie_antoinette_400x531.jpg)

(http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/CHRPOD/ICN16119315701~A-Fine-and-Important-Miniature-of-Queen-Marie-Antoinette-1755-1793-Posters.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: veu-1 on April 12, 2007, 03:10:00 PM
Thanks! ;)

Other pics:

(http://www.amuletum.com/images/St221-1Ritr.jpg)

(http://images.usatoday.com/life/_photos/2006/01/12/inside-queenbooks-antoinett.jpg)

(http://www.geh.org/ar/strip43/m197400560321.jpg)

(http://imagesource.art.com/images/-/Francois-Dumont/Queen-Marie-Antoinette-Of-France-1755-1793-Giclee-Print-C11785284.jpeg)

(http://www.marie--antoinette.de/Leben/marie-antoinette.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: veu-1 on April 12, 2007, 03:13:34 PM
(http://www.batguano.com/VLBmarie1800.jpg)

(http://imagesource.art.com/images/-/Alfred-Cox/Marie-Antoinette-1755-93-of-Habsbourg-Lorraine-Queen-of-France-and-Navarre-Giclee-Print-C11725650.jpeg)

(http://dickens.stanford.edu/images/Tale%20Issue%201/944youngquee.jpg)

(http://www.louvre.fr/media/repository/ressources/sources/illustration/autres/x196image_58163_v2_m56577569830591468.jpg)

(http://www.clipartreview.com/_gallery/_TN/83552.gif)

(http://www.culture.gouv.fr/Wave/image/joconde/0018/m502004_87ee603_p.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Antie on April 15, 2007, 07:05:16 PM
Two drawings:

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v175/u-gin/for%20antie/marieantoinette_col.png)

(http://www.absoludicrous.net/antares7/off/r/marie.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on April 16, 2007, 12:31:53 PM
Look like an illustration from the Japanese Cartoon "The Rose Of Versailles". It featured the life of Marie Antoinette.  ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Louis_Charles on May 09, 2007, 01:25:09 PM
In several of the portraits posted, the Queen is wearing Empire-waisted gowns and her hair is dressed in a style that really didn't take off until after her death. Were there a lot of posthumous portraits? And what was the point of giving her a "contemporary" look? She is dressed in similar fashion as the effigy on her tomb. Just curious.

Thanks,

Simon
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on May 09, 2007, 08:37:28 PM
I think the style of dress had beun to relax about the time of the revolution. It came into full flower in the Empire style, but the change had begun in the last years of the revolution.  ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: veu-1 on May 19, 2007, 05:08:19 PM
(http://www.geocities.com/imo146/maria_antonietta/big/marie35.jpg)

(http://www.historycentral.com/WH1400-1900/Biographies/Antoinette.jpg)

(http://worldroots.com/brigitte/gifs4/habs198.jpg)

(http://artfiles.art.com/images/-/Franz-Wagenschon/Archduchess-Marie-Antoinette-Habsburg-Lothringen-1755-93-at-the-spinnet-Giclee-Print-C11726880.jpeg)

(http://www.catholicforum.com/saints/ncd05075.jpg)

(http://www.aeiou.at/aeiou.encyclop.data.image.m/m222929a.jpg)

(http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a382/KatinkaLafave/MariealsMdchen1.jpg)

(http://www.batguano.com/VLBmarose4.jpg)

(http://www.batguano.com/VLBMArose.jpg)

(http://www.artres.com/LowRes2/TR3/F/W/J/F/ART16965.jpg)

(http://www.marie-antoinette-association.com/images/profil2.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Nikolasha on May 22, 2007, 04:38:08 AM
My favorit pic of Marie Antoinette  :)


(http://www.ladyreading.net/marieantoinette/big/marie23a.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on May 22, 2007, 04:45:08 AM
she was reputed to have flawless skin... ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Lyra on May 27, 2007, 02:43:15 PM
Hello..

I really love Marie Antoinette and her daughter Charlotte !!



Oh i'm new and .. sorry for my bad english
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on May 27, 2007, 07:36:08 PM
Charlotte ?  ??? You mean Marie Therese ?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Lyra on May 28, 2007, 08:16:58 AM
Yep I mean Marie Thérèse Charlotte de France first daughter of Marie Antoinette Josèphe Jeanne and Louis Auguste .. She was called Madame Royale by those who lived in Versailles, but her usual name was NOT Marie-Térèse but Charlotte (that's how her family called her)
That's why I call her Charlotte, I never call her marie-therese because of her grand mother (she's not know as it) but I reckon that her signature was "marie thérèse charlotte".. So for calling her we can say Marie Thérèse Charlotte or Charlotte or Madame Royale (or duchesse d'angoulême)...

It's just as  Marie-Philippine-Élisabeth-hélène de France : Madame Elisabeth and other member of the royal family..

Soon after her release from her jail, The orphan of the temple : Charlotte (or la jeune infortunée) started to sign as "Marie Thérèse", and that's why we can believe in substitution theroies (added to her profile who changed totally..)

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on May 28, 2007, 07:53:59 PM
I read that she became a childless and sour woman.  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: lori_c on June 01, 2007, 09:17:43 AM

  In fact what I read was that it was after the return from Varennes, when she took off her travel hat in the Tuileries that she found out that her hair had become white as an old lady!! So the theory that her hair was ash blonde made sense to me since it is I think easier to pass from ash blonde to white thatn to red hair to white.



In Antonia Fraser's book, she says sources describe the Queen's hair as "dishwater" blonde whis is basically ash.  I did not read anything decribing it as red. Also when her hair was cut after the birth of Marie Therese, her hairdresser made the same observation.  The powdering of it did not take away from it's essential blondness.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: lori_c on June 01, 2007, 09:22:18 AM
Though this may have been answered, I could not find it on any other thread.

Does anybody know of the descendants of Marie Antoinette Living today.  I know some would be through Marie Carolina, her sister. 

Also, she has a Hessian Ancestor shared by Empress Alexandra of Russia - George II

Does anybody know how these two women descended from him? Was her fate ever considered a part of the fabled "Hessian Curse"?

Any help would be appreciated.  Thanks!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Robert_Hall on June 01, 2007, 09:45:37 AM
Descendents of MA ?There are none. Al 3 of her children died without children of their own. Of her brothers & sisters, however, there are plenty. You might look at a Habsburg genealogy, it is pretty vast.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: lori_c on June 01, 2007, 02:38:02 PM
Yes, what I was interested in was her brothers and sisters.  And if there are any alive today from them.

I also was confused about her descendancy from George II, Landgrave of Hesse who also can claim Empress Alexandra as a descendant.   I wasn' t sure how these women tie together.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Robert_Hall on June 01, 2007, 06:54:51 PM
Gosh, Lori. There are boatloads of Habsburgs!!! Archbuke Otto is the current head of the family. A Google search could get you started, but if you really want to get into Habsburg genealogy,  there are Almanachs a plenty.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: royalboy202 on June 01, 2007, 07:36:15 PM
Marie-Antoinette was a 2nd cousin to two of Alix of Hesse Great Great Grandfathers  (Fredrick-Fraz, Duke of Saxe-Saalfeld & King Fredrick-William II of Prussia). i guess that would make them 2nd cousins 4 times removed.


Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: britt.25 on June 02, 2007, 03:16:14 PM
Interesting was also to me that MA had Bourbon blood herself quite a lot, foe example through her father´s mother, who was the daughter of Liselotte von der Pfalz and Philippe of Orléans.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on June 03, 2007, 04:42:51 AM
Golden hair has red in it...so that may be the difference in description by people. On  the style of powdering the hair... I found a funny antedote by  Elizabeth Vigee-Lebrun the Artist that painted Marie Antoinette so often "This reminds me that in 1786, when I was painting the Queen, I begged her to use no powder, and to part her hair on the forehead. "I should be the last to follow that fashion," said the Queen, laughing; "I do not want people to say that I adopted it to hide my large forehead." :D
from the memoirs of Elizabeth Vigee LeBrun
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: lori_c on June 04, 2007, 09:33:50 AM
Gosh, Lori. There are boatloads of Habsburgs!!! Archbuke Otto is the current head of the family. A Google search could get you started, but if you really want to get into Habsburg genealogy,  there are Almanachs a plenty.
Thank so much! I don't have a library system or much access to a lot of important Almanachs such as those so I really appreaciate all of your help.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: lori_c on June 04, 2007, 09:36:02 AM
Marie-Antoinette was a 2nd cousin to two of Alix of Hesse Great Great Grandfathers  (Fredrick-Fraz, Duke of Saxe-Saalfeld & King Fredrick-William II of Prussia). i guess that would make them 2nd cousins 4 times removed.



The book by Antonia Fraser mentions as a sidenote that not only did MA keep The Princesses of Hesse as they were referred to as lifelong friends but that she and Alix were 4th generation cousins.  I could not find the tie in as I have limited access where I live and the internet search for me was fruitless,  But now it all ties together.  Thank you alll once again.

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: lori_c on June 04, 2007, 09:36:44 AM
Interesting was also to me that MA had Bourbon blood herself quite a lot, foe example through her father´s mother, who was the daughter of Liselotte von der Pfalz and Philippe of Orléans.
Isn't that interesting?  She had more French blood, it seems than her husband.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: veu-1 on June 04, 2007, 03:49:49 PM
(http://www.image-share.net/image/21345/marie123.jpg)

(http://i16.tinypic.com/2mr9qbp.jpg)

(http://i17.tinypic.com/2vux8ag.jpg)

(http://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/searchimages/13.jpg)

(http://www.goldleafdesigns.com/availableantiquesimages/marie_antoinette_portrait.jpg)

(http://www.lasplash.com/artman/uploads/portrait_of_marie_antoinette.jpg)

(http://www.antique-prints.de/shop/Media/Shop/2147.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on June 04, 2007, 07:56:11 PM
Very similar ones. I think they copy each other...She only sat for a limited amount.  ???
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: gogm on June 05, 2007, 12:47:52 AM
I'm not sure how many of these will be repeats -

Marie Antoinette presented with wine:
(http://inlinethumb07.webshots.com/5446/2002258000094285158S600x600Q85.jpg) (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2002258000094285158qEPxxy)

Marie Antoinette as Hebe:
(http://inlinethumb11.webshots.com/3530/2110051080094285158S600x600Q85.jpg) (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2110051080094285158DsMDFU)

Marie Antoinette and Princesse de Lamballe:
(http://inlinethumb35.webshots.com/5666/2531996080094285158S600x600Q85.jpg) (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2531996080094285158gGxIAV)

1788 Print of Marie Antoinette
(http://inlinethumb14.webshots.com/6413/2726198600094285158S600x600Q85.jpg) (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2726198600094285158KaPuNs)

Marie Antoinette in 1771
\(http://inlinethumb62.webshots.com/3197/2231672990094285158S600x600Q85.jpg) (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2231672990094285158qhlbWU)

1773 Marie Antoinette Dauphine
(http://inlinethumb21.webshots.com/5204/2737811420094285158S600x600Q85.jpg) (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2737811420094285158HUVNwU)

1777 Marie Antoinette in high coiffure
(http://inlinethumb63.webshots.com/2878/2064123710094285158S600x600Q85.jpg) (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2064123710094285158LoycgB)

1780 Marie Antoinette with daughter
(http://inlinethumb46.webshots.com/3885/2072032260094285158S600x600Q85.jpg) (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2072032260094285158EoqARv)

More to follow. :)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: gogm on June 05, 2007, 12:54:17 AM
Marie Antoinette portrait in 1778:
(http://inlinethumb49.webshots.com/3120/2710859150094285158S600x600Q85.jpg) (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2710859150094285158GoLuDz)

Marie Antoinette face and grand coiffure:
(http://inlinethumb57.webshots.com/4920/2266865260094285158S600x600Q85.jpg) (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2266865260094285158uXHvEM)

Marie Antoinette in full headdress:
(http://inlinethumb21.webshots.com/1940/2920544920094285158S600x600Q85.jpg) (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2920544920094285158fIITha)

A replica of the infamous necklace:
(http://inlinethumb47.webshots.com/6062/2364211940094285158S600x600Q85.jpg) (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2364211940094285158WUgzyN)

Marie Antoinette print:
(http://inlinethumb46.webshots.com/6701/2465483320094285158S600x600Q85.jpg) (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2465483320094285158koZLgp)

More to follow. :)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: gogm on June 05, 2007, 01:13:20 AM






Famous Marie Antoinette holding rose:
(http://inlinethumb10.webshots.com/3337/2894115130094285158S600x600Q85.jpg) (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2894115130094285158iJeWOj)

Marie Antoinette Reine de France in profile:
(http://inlinethumb05.webshots.com/3076/2635821470094285158S600x600Q85.jpg) (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2635821470094285158rrEiVw)

Marie Antoinette as Shepherdess:
(http://inlinethumb12.webshots.com/3467/2435176180094285158S600x600Q85.jpg) (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2435176180094285158MOuMBS)

Marie Antoinette in full dress:
(http://inlinethumb12.webshots.com/3467/2435176180094285158S600x600Q85.jpg) (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2435176180094285158MOuMBS)

Marie Antoinette in blue grand dress:
(http://inlinethumb34.webshots.com/5985/2764343480094285158S600x600Q85.jpg) (http://entertainment.webshots.com/photo/2764343480094285158wTZMSX)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on June 05, 2007, 04:04:33 AM
Madame Vigee LeBrun said that Marie Antoinette had the most beautiful skin. At the end of her life ...I have only ever seen the one of her in the Cart on the way to the Scaffold so thank you for these beautiful pictures.

I can imagine as graceful as She danced at a Ball in these clothes and with Jewels She would have been quite dazzling. In one of the Memoirs maybe it was Campan or Madame Elizabeth's letters, it was mentioned that Louis held the miniature of her and the Children until the last day of his life and then his miniature of them was given to Marie Antoinette and ..this is not an exact quote but that he wanted her and the Children's dear faces to look at until the end. ::)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on June 05, 2007, 04:30:04 AM
I think it was more of a legend. If he loved her so much, why did he took so long to take the small operation. Had MA been a mother earlier, she would have woke up faster... ???
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: britt.25 on June 05, 2007, 05:29:32 AM
Yes, I found that somewhere fascinating, that she was so hated for being "austrian" even when being so close connected to the Bourbons from her blood....

Lori_c, if you are interested in more about the todays Habsburgs (there are really soooo many) but only one head of the family: Otto, please do also look at the topic about Otto von Habsburg and his wife Regina. ;)
I posted for example one quite interesting interview there and a letter-which a person of the family sent to me- and where Otto names his son Karl to his coming successor (very discussed in his family, because of his lifestyle..) Please look there, if you are interested!!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: britt.25 on June 05, 2007, 05:30:16 AM
I forgot to say: It´s surely in the Habsburg thread! :D
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: britt.25 on June 05, 2007, 05:38:19 AM
It´s strange, but I have read how unhappy she was because he did not sleep with her after the marriage and also a long time after it as well. She always wrote about her feelings to her mother empress Maria Theresia, he was only interested in other things, she said, but not in sexual things. I think it was his brother- in -law emperor Joseph II., who had to persuade him to do this operation. It was said that he could not "love" her before that. true?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: lori_c on June 05, 2007, 05:29:27 PM
Thank you Britt for your kindness.  Sometimes I get answers to my questions in a way that people don't realize that I am on the Forum to learn and they take for granted I should already know.

You are so kind to help.

Thanks again,

Lori
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on June 05, 2007, 07:29:40 PM
Yes it was big brother Joseph II to the rescue ! I think he did not "love' her until then.  ???
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on June 06, 2007, 07:03:03 AM
Yes, according to the Madame Campan memoirs (contemporary) they had a cold relationship until the surgery and the birth of the first Child seems to have cemented the affection. As she was in the Chamber with Marie Antoinette, her Memoirs really give you a first hand look at the Marriage. They really became a devoted Couple.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on June 06, 2007, 07:47:18 PM
It was then too late for MA to change. The years of gambling, dress, balls and idleness ruined her reputation beyond repair.   :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: gogm on June 06, 2007, 09:15:13 PM
I believe MA changed, but not her reputation. She also changed a great deal under the pressure of the revolution.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: gogm on June 06, 2007, 09:39:52 PM
Here are some pics of Marie Antoinette's well-known friends.

Princesse de Lamballe:
(http://inlinethumb03.webshots.com/3394/2773100170094285158S600x600Q85.jpg) (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2773100170094285158ShCWzG)

Another of the Princesse de Lamballe:
(http://inlinethumb46.webshots.com/4589/2272116600094285158S600x600Q85.jpg) (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2272116600094285158IoBVUP)
She died in a mob atrocity in 1791.

And the notorious Gabrielle de Polastron, duchesse de Polignac:
(http://inlinethumb46.webshots.com/4333/2522543120094285158S600x600Q85.jpg) (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2522543120094285158VqiyCz)

And another:
(http://inlinethumb15.webshots.com/5198/2268026930094285158S600x600Q85.jpg) (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2268026930094285158EBjyuP)

She got in time and died of natural causes.

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on June 06, 2007, 09:43:45 PM
Lambelle was a great princess and a truly devoted friend to MA.  :'(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: britt.25 on June 07, 2007, 02:22:31 AM
Wasn´t she also in friendship with her sister-in-law, sister of Louis XVI? I think so!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: britt.25 on June 07, 2007, 02:25:41 AM
It doesn´t matter how the grade of knowledge is, I think it´s always good to learn, also from each other. For this this is a free forum. There were times, where I did not know many of those things as well, it came with the interest, and the interest with the time and with the learning ;) Please feel free to make more topics on the Habsburg thread.... ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on June 07, 2007, 03:10:30 AM
You mean Madame Elisabeth ? Possibly ! They were both gentle and unassuming personalities, although Madame Elisabeth was a bit more serious in nature.  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: britt.25 on June 07, 2007, 05:42:35 AM
Yes, I have read about that relationship of them for ex. in the book "Habsburgs vergessene Kinder" by Leitner. There is a huge part on the fates of Marie Therese and Louis XVI and in that connection there was also something about Madame Elisabeth. I think little Louis also loved his aunt, I read about the difficult farewell of them before going to prison.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: veu-1 on June 07, 2007, 03:48:32 PM
Other Marie Antoinette pics:

(http://i11.tinypic.com/6fre7vb.jpg)

(http://i19.tinypic.com/53jtdoy.jpg)

(http://i7.tinypic.com/5z3x7a8.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on June 08, 2007, 06:39:07 AM
The thing about the  Princess Lambelle's death is one of the most disturbing reads for such a gentle soul. At one point I looked up the friends of Marie Antoinette to find out how they fared...and then I ran into a contemporary description of that!!!

The memoirs of Vigee Le Brun who painted both her and the Princess Elizabeth and this is what she says:

"About this time I also painted the Princess de Lamballe. Without being actually pretty, she appeared so at a little distance; she had small features, complexion of dazzling freshness, superb blond locks, and was generally elegant in person. The unhappy end of this unfortunate Princess is sufficently well known, and so is the devotion to which she fell a victim. For in 1793, when she was at Turin, entirely out of harm's way, she returned to France upon learning that the Queen was in danger." and on the Princess Elizabeth a little story:

ith the exception of the Count d'Artois, whose portrait I never did, I successively painted the whole royal family – the royal children; Monsieur, the King's brother, afterward Louis XVIII.; Madame Royale; the Countess d'Artois; Madame Elisabeth. The features of this last named Princess were not regular, but her face expressed gentle affability, and the freshness of her complexion was remarkable; altogether, she had the charm of a pretty shepherdess. She was an angel of goodness. Many a time have I been a witness to her deeds of charity on behalf of the poor. All the virtues were in her heart: she was indulgent, modest, compassionate, devoted. In the Revolution she displayed heroic courage; she was seen going forward to meet the cannibals who had come to murder the Queen, saying, "They will mistake me for her!"
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: lori_c on June 08, 2007, 03:06:51 PM
Thank you so much!  I will definitely look about Otto von Habsburg.

An interesting thought, I realize that Marie Antoinette and Alix were related through Prussian blood as well as Saxe-Saalfield (did this come through her mother's side?)  But did she have any Hessian blood.  If in fact she was descended from George II Landrave of Hesse as was Alix?  If so, do you feel that the fabled Hessian curse struck again with Marie Antoinette?  I realize of course, there are more practical and documented reasons for what led the poor doomed Queen to her death.  I just find the other side of things like that so called curse quite intringuing and as I am not well versed with the Habsburg/Bourbon/Orleans just yet, I was surprise to learn of this descent and how much she had in common with her Russian counterpart.

Is it true that MA Grand neice was also a Queen of France?  Forgive my ignorance, but I am new at this subject and quite excited to learn.  And tht her daughter was considered Queen or Dowager Queen for a very short time??

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: britt.25 on June 08, 2007, 04:23:48 PM
I must confess that now I am the one, who is not too well informed about any russian or hessian connections of Marie Antoinette. People have sooo many ansistors, but I give you the advice to check out the wonderful page genea Portugal. It is one of my favourite genealogy sites. It´s wonderful, how you can lead the people back in their ancestry. I always use that page, and there you see all ansistors of the Habsburgs, like those of Maria Antonia (=Marie Antoinette). From her mothers side it can be that she hads hessian blood, surely, I have to check out the page again by myself, I already looked there several times, to see the ancestry of empress Maria Theresia, and you find everything there. About the Romanovs I do not know very much I must confess, because I was always concerned with the others, especially with the Habsburgs and Bonapartes. Yes, Marie Antoinette´s grandniece was also queen of France. It was Marie Louise of Austria, daughter of emperor Franz II./I. , himself son of Marie Antoinettes brother Leopold II., firstly reigning in Tuscany and then also following his "illuminated" brother Joseph II. as holy roman emperor. Napoleon Bonaparte (Napoleon I.) married Marie Louise in his second marriage, it was a political marriage, but also because his first wife Josephine could not give him any heir. Their son was Franz von Reichstadt was quite unlucky, lived under some of arrest by the austrians, he grew up at the Habsburg court and died with 21 at tuberculosis. Please check out our topics about Marie Louise and Franz. I would be happy, if they will be read again, also new comments would be great, because at the moment those topics seem to be out of interest :(
Marie Louise also had two children by Montenuovo: Wilhelm Adalbert und Albertine. Please have a look on the thread, where I also posted one of my drawings on the last descendant of Albertine, Giovanni Sanvitale ;D  ;) 
And about the daughter of Marie Antoinette: Marie Thérèse, was never considered as queen, she was married to her cousin Louis-Antoine de Bourbon-Artois, duke of Angoulême, but they never had children. Some mythology wants to say that Madame Royale was "exchanged" by a halfsister, who appeared to marry Louis Antoine, and the real Madame royale lived somewhere in obscurity, but this is rather a thesis based on mythology and suspicion.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Duke of New Jersey on June 08, 2007, 05:23:03 PM
Marie Antoinette's neice, Maria Amalia of the Two Scilices (daughter of Ferdinand and Maria Carolina) was Queen of the French, wife of King Louis-Phillipe d'Orleans (king 1830-1848). 

Quote
Marie Thérèse, was never considered as queen, she was married to her cousin Louis-Antoine de Bourbon-Artois, duke of Angoulême
He is/was considered to be King of France for 20 minutes on August 20 1830 after his father's abdication (Charles X) and before Louis-Phillipe d'Orleans took the throne. 

-Duke of NJ
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on June 08, 2007, 08:20:34 PM
Indeed ! She need not die if she remained in Turin. She shown she great love for MA.  ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: britt.25 on June 09, 2007, 05:45:30 AM
Marie Antoinette's neice, Maria Amalia of the Two Scilices (daughter of Ferdinand and Maria Carolina) was Queen of the French, wife of King Louis-Phillipe d'Orleans (king 1830-1848). 

Quote
Marie Thérèse, was never considered as queen, she was married to her cousin Louis-Antoine de Bourbon-Artois, duke of Angoulême
He is/was considered to be King of France for 20 minutes on August 20 1830 after his father's abdication (Charles X) and before Louis-Phillipe d'Orleans took the throne. 

-Duke of NJ


Sorry, my knowledge was not complete here :-\
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: trentk80 on June 09, 2007, 09:17:22 AM
An interesting thought, I realize that Marie Antoinette and Alix were related through Prussian blood as well as Saxe-Saalfield (did this come through her mother's side?)  But did she have any Hessian blood.  If in fact she was descended from George II Landrave of Hesse as was Alix? 

Marie Antoinette had Hessian blood indeed. She descended from Landgrave George II of Hesse-Darmstadt through his daughter Elizabeth Amalia. Alix also descended from Landgrave George II but through his eldest son, Landgrave Louis VI of Hesse-Darmstadt.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: lori_c on June 11, 2007, 06:47:14 PM
Thank you so much for taking the time to explain this to me.  I am DEFINITELY going to "bump up" the threads because they are of much interest to me as well and I am very ignorant on the subject.  As a side note, the Bourbons and Orleans have much influence in New Orleans, where I live.  In the French Quarter there are streets named for almost all of the the Princes of the Blood so to speak.  Such as Conti St is one example. We have a hotel here called the Bourbon Orleans which is pretty ritzy upscale. And much much more French influenced art and architecture as well as names.  It's amazing. I will definitely look at your drawing.

Thanks Britt!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: lori_c on June 11, 2007, 06:50:28 PM
An interesting thought, I realize that Marie Antoinette and Alix were related through Prussian blood as well as Saxe-Saalfield (did this come through her mother's side?)  But did she have any Hessian blood.  If in fact she was descended from George II Landrave of Hesse as was Alix? 

Marie Antoinette had Hessian blood indeed. She descended from Landgrave George II of Hesse-Darmstadt through his daughter Elizabeth Amalia. Alix also descended from Landgrave George II but through his eldest son, Landgrave Louis VI of Hesse-Darmstadt.
Thank you also Trent.  I researched through the often unreliable wikipedia having no other resource available and I kept hitting a dead end.  I appreciate your kindness. :)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: britt.25 on June 12, 2007, 02:58:45 AM
Thank you so much for taking the time to explain this to me.  I am DEFINITELY going to "bump up" the threads because they are of much interest to me as well and I am very ignorant on the subject.  As a side note, the Bourbons and Orleans have much influence in New Orleans, where I live.  In the French Quarter there are streets named for almost all of the the Princes of the Blood so to speak.  Such as Conti St is one example. We have a hotel here called the Bourbon Orleans which is pretty ritzy upscale. And much much more French influenced art and architecture as well as names.  It's amazing. I will definitely look at your drawing.

Thanks Britt!

Hello, It´s interesting with the influence of the french royal family on your hometown, I did not know much about that before. Also the facts that streets are names after different lines of the family or different people from the family, it´s amazing, do you have more examples for it?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: lori_c on June 12, 2007, 09:47:06 AM
I will think of more but here are some, we have a town called Lafayette, Streets named Louis XVI, Bourbon St., Napoleon Avenue, Lafayette Square is a sort of park (you can see it in the  movie JFK by Oliver Stone if you want to take a look).

My mind is drawing a blank but I will provide more later! ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Lyra on June 20, 2007, 11:30:47 AM
They absolutly did wear wig... Never, never, never Marie Antoinette would have go out in Versailles without her wig..

That was in 18th century laidie's manners inherited from Louis XIV who forced every one to bear wig because He was loosing his hair. This manner was abolish with the Revolution. Actually Madame Royal asked (when she was liberated) if she had to put a wig to cover her real hair... because it was stange to her no wearing one.

So MA's hair was blond (as in her younger picture) but she wore grey wig as everybody in the French Court ^^' Plus, the more her wig is important and white / grey the more people know that you have an important rank in the society..

A long time ago, i've found a very funny drawing of Voltaire concerning wigs and how big (and exepensive !) were they... hihi (i'll try to find it if some of you want to see it)

I've search for the "coiffure à la Franklin" but I did not find it in my works.. so sorry. keep searching for it..
(and.. it's not Marie Therese.. She was called Charlotte ....)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: CountessKate on June 21, 2007, 01:28:22 PM
Women did not wear wigs - only men wore wigs as a matter of course.  Women added curls and padded out their hair over frames to achieve those tremendous high fashions, but they only wore wigs if their hair had been cut short or had fallen out or thinned because of illness or age.  It just wasn't the done thing for a fashionable woman to wear a wig.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: FaithWhiteRose on June 22, 2007, 04:02:57 PM
Its not red here though ???
(http://www.ladyreading.net/marieantoinette/big/marie20.jpg)

Kirsten Dunst's hair did so well as Marie's.

I don't think Marie's hair was red---platinum it seems.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: veu-1 on June 28, 2007, 04:25:41 PM
Others MA pics:

(http://i8.tinypic.com/66kyeeu.jpg)

(http://i14.tinypic.com/68kphcg.jpg)

(http://i7.tinypic.com/628rucl.jpg)

(http://i7.tinypic.com/6fhq16v.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 08, 2007, 07:42:33 PM
Yes that is one of my favourites too...now in Schonbrunn Palace.  ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: FaithWhiteRose on July 08, 2007, 09:07:41 PM
 :D thanks for the location, Eric. my parents went to France, and I'm greened with envy---not only by the history and the art they got to experience, but the luscious creme-brou-le they were mesmerized by . . . anyway, she (Marie) looks so much like herself in that one. a true pretty, stylish, classical, white-skinned beauty slash Fashion Queen.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Annie on July 10, 2007, 08:15:26 PM
She looks so...old, IMO. If you really look at the detail of her face, you can tell she's young, but at first glance, she looks so much older because of the white wigs. You may laugh at this, but when I was young I used to think Marie Antionette was an old lady! I was shocked to find out she was only in her mid thirties when she died and had young children. I had always imagined her an elderly lady because of the wigs. IMO I don't know what ever made people in those days think those white wigs were attractive, they made everyone look older. Maybe it was different in real life and it's only in paintings they look old. There were no photos back then so we'll never know.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 10, 2007, 08:30:54 PM
It was known that MA had clear flawless skin... ::)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: FaithWhiteRose on July 11, 2007, 08:49:19 PM
The fashion in the 1700s, such as "old looking wigs" are now laughed at. someday people will do the same to us!  ;D
but Marie is still beautiful to me, looking old or young . . .
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: CountessKate on July 12, 2007, 07:13:46 AM
Women didn't wear wigs except where they had lost their hair due to illness or old age.  Only men wore wigs as an ordinary part of their daily costume.  Women's hair was grown long, then padded and greased and frizzed to achieve the high structures of the late 18th century.  Additional curls may have been added where they didn't have enough hair to create the full effect.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 12, 2007, 08:04:02 PM
I think MA did more wigs later in life.... ???
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on July 13, 2007, 02:29:40 AM
Don't ask me why but I actually think the powdered hair and patches (worn far into the eighteenth century) are elegant. I just think fashion came together at that time with clothes and jewels and hats and hair. Mind I don't care for the three foot tall hair with birdcages, I'm referring to the above hair in these Portraits of Marie Antoinette.  Vigee Le Brun when she painted Marie Antoinette said of her "But the most remarkable thing about her face was the splendour of her complexion. I never have seen one so brilliant, and brilliant is the word, for her skin was so transparent that it bore no umber in the painting. Neither could I render the real effect of it as I wished. I had no colours to paint such freshness, such delicate tints, which were hers alone, and which I had never seen in any other woman." If you had that kind of complexion or that kind of beauty you could really transcend clothes and hair of any Century.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 13, 2007, 03:25:59 AM
Yes...good complextion is greatly admired then. I think Charlotte Corday was also admired because of her fine skin.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: CountessKate on July 13, 2007, 12:27:35 PM
Quote
I think MA did more wigs later in life....

Her hair thinned very much in 1776 at a time of stress and depression for her, and continued to be a problem during her pregnancy in 1778, to the extent that her hairdresser Leonard had to create a short, feathery hairstyle called 'coiffure a l'enfant' for her.  She continued to wear more elaborate hairstyles when her hair recovered later on, apparently.  Neither Antonia Fraser nor Caroline Weber (whose study of Marie Antoinette and fashion is very extensive) mention wigs.  At the end of her life, with a severe illness and in a state of shock and depression, her hair was thinner still of course.  Madame de Campan recorded that after the return from Varennes, her hair had turned completely white.

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 13, 2007, 09:01:34 PM
Yes...no need for the white powder then ?  :-\
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: CountessKate on July 14, 2007, 03:29:13 AM
No, no need for powder.  But unfortunately, powder was going out of fashion.......
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: gogm on July 14, 2007, 01:35:25 PM
I recall hearing that the UK imposed a tax on the powder that hastened the end of the fashion.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: FaithWhiteRose on July 14, 2007, 05:04:22 PM
Don't ask me why but I actually think the powdered hair and patches (worn far into the eighteenth century) are elegant.

I don't know if they were elegant on everyone, but they sure were charming on Marie.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 15, 2007, 10:12:30 PM
MA's greatest asset was her charm. So sad that she didn't have much opportunity to use it much.  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: imperial angel on July 16, 2007, 05:34:41 PM
My understanding on this subject is that because there had long been rumors ( and back in the day there were many imposters, and according to a 2002 book, it's said some of them didn't accept the DNA testing, so they had a website still advocating their claim!!!- shades of the Romanovs- this was the Naundorf family), they did DNA testing on what was thought to be his heart. This was the heart from the autopsy of the boy who died in prison, believed to be the Dauphin. Anyway, they matched this DNA with DNA ftom the hair of Marie Antoinette's sisters ( two of them), and also with her hair that been saved during her life through mitochondrial DNA. They also used the DNA of living relatives, descendants of MA's relatives. It matched, but it didn't match the DNA of the Naundorf imposter, obtained from his remains. So, it proved that the boy who died in prison was MA's son. His remains today are not known, and there was much controversy throughout history about that, which added to the controversy already surounding the imposters, and the whole question. Again, much like the Romanovs. I read this book by Deborah Cadbury, I think it's called France's Lost King. Has anyone read this? I enjoyed it, but it was published in 2002, so I'm not sure what has happened since then, if anything.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mary R. on July 16, 2007, 06:15:49 PM
She certainly used it while living!  ;)

Mary R.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 16, 2007, 07:40:30 PM
Rarely in front of the people...If they get to see her more. They would have fallen under her charm. It is tragic that she moved away from the court & the people to the Trainon.  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 16, 2007, 07:42:54 PM
There is always going to be mystery about it. Even I felt the result was too tidy and looked like a rushed job to close the chapter.  ???
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mary R. on July 16, 2007, 08:58:46 PM
Absolutely! Just think if she had traveled extensively around the country, visible to the public. I recently read a book on her and it stated that her journeys to and from the various palaces were the only glimpses she had of France! It further states that her sisters-in-law never saw the capital city of Paris! Unfortunately it was the "norm" for the time.  :(

Mary R.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 16, 2007, 09:31:54 PM
Well...maybe in France. Maria Theresia (who got similar charm) was highly visable to the people and remained popular during her lifetime. She did warn her daughter about losing her popularity with the people (the French was quite taken by her youth and beauty, and if MA had focused on politics instead of silly balls and dresses, she might have developed a power base).  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mary R. on July 16, 2007, 11:44:59 PM
Very true! The French court was more isolated from the everyday "hustle and bustle" of its subjects.  :(

Mary R.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 17, 2007, 01:28:10 AM
Yes. The isolation made it easy for people like Provence and Orleans to blacken her name once news about her spending became public knowledge. MA should have focused on finding supporters like Anne of Austria and Catherine/Marie de Medici did.  ???
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on July 17, 2007, 04:06:43 AM
 Charm helped...Beauty helped.... but She really needed advice before She ever went to France. An Austrian Bride was an unpopular choice to the French People. She was young and it was hard for her to separate out who gave good Counsel at the French Court. If only Louis had been more interested in his Bride...in the beginning....
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 17, 2007, 05:38:43 AM
Well...Louis XIII was exactly crazy about Anne of Austria. However she was much serious than MA ever was. Maria Theresia tried to divert her daughter towards more serious subjects, but she was only too happy to disgard them. If one read her final warning towards MA, one could see how accurate she foretold her daughter's fate.  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: imperial angel on July 17, 2007, 05:09:30 PM
Charm helped...Beauty helped.... but She really needed advice before She ever went to France. An Austrian Bride was an unpopular choice to the French People. She was young and it was hard for her to separate out who gave good Counsel at the French Court. If only Louis had been more interested in his Bride...in the beginning....

Well, they were both pretty young. I don't know if him being more interested in her would have helped any. She did need advice, but but who could have given that, although MA's mother certainly gave much advice in letters to her daughter that I have read, but she wasn't from the French Court, although some of her advice just seems to be commonsense. Of course, had he paid more attention to her, she might have been less extravagant when young, less of the frivolous, if that stemmed from her unhappy marriage early on.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 17, 2007, 07:49:19 PM
Well...some of the blame must be at her door, certainly MA's sister Caroline had an even toghter time in Naples, yet she succeeded while her sister failed. MA was careless and lazy even in the Austrian court.  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mary R. on July 17, 2007, 08:14:37 PM
Absolutely! Carolina was married by proxy, filling in for her two dead sisters! Her ascension to the throne was rockier than her sister's, but the social circumstances were somewhat different. Carolina's country expanded in academic circles during some relatively prosperous years. Unfortunately for MA, France was somewhat unstable.  :(

On a side note, I am currently reading Crowned in a Far Country which includes biographies on both Marie Antoinette and Maria Carolina. It gives a condensed biography of these two women (among others) in about ten pages. A good read!  :)

Mary R.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 17, 2007, 10:22:18 PM
Indeed ! However Maria Carolina was more studious and clever than her lazy sister. Another of her sisters (whose story had been ignored by historians and biographers) Mara Amalia, who married a boy of 15 in Parma, was also interesting. Unlike Carolina, she made another mess of things there.  ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on July 18, 2007, 04:12:56 AM
Yes, I agree Mary R.,  France was much more unstable. Louis XIV separated the Court and moved them to Versailles from Paris which isolated them too much. Years of War had drained funds and then putting money into helping the American Colonies become independent pretty much finished it. The Country was in terrible financial shape.

 But what I mean about Louis taking more interest in the marriage early on is that Marie Antoinette would have been less frivolous I believe. She knew that providing an Heir was of utmost importance. You can see that once She had children she settled down.

The French Court had all these  factions:  intrigue...rumor, gossip, viciousness... and even among her friends...look at the different influence's  provided by either Polignac or Lamballe. And then too you have to realize that  even  if you marry as She did....it doesn't mean you have political aptitude.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 18, 2007, 05:07:08 AM
Well...That made sense. However because she had a mother like Maria Theresia and a sister like Caroline, it made MA seemed much lacking in political mindness. Also she recieved instuctions from her mother on a regular basis, had she followed that advice, she would have been in less trouble than what did happen.  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: CountessKate on July 18, 2007, 06:54:31 AM
While Maria Theresa certainly supplied common sense and instruction from afar, she was instrumental in ensuring that Marie Antoinette had no educational grounding in preparing her for her role in a foreign country.  Sending a 14 year old into a very sophisticated foreign court with a very hazy idea of what to expect or how to deal with it is a pretty good recipe for disaster, and she ensured that her daughter would rebel (albeit by lying or evasion) by continually sending her scolding letters, even if they were full of common sense.

In comparing the sisters, in Maria Carolina's case she went into a very unsophisticated environment where she had the opportunity to fill a vacant leading role - the queen's role was hers by right of marriage, there were no other family members close by to defer to, her husband was lazy and happy for her to share his political duties - and of course she became pregnant relatively quickly and did her chief duty of producing lots of heirs.  Marie Antoinette was very far down the pecking order politically and in terms of influence at the French Court, Louis XV wouldn't have dreamt of sharing one iota of his power with her under any circumstances whatever, and Louis XVI wasn't keen to do that either, her role as fashion leader was initially Mme de Barry's, and she produced no children - the main requirement of her position - until very much later than expected of her, through no fault of her own.  In her very powerless and uncomfortable situation she turned to the extravagances of fashion and spendthrift behaviour focused very much on herself and while she could have spent the time improving her mind and educating herself or turning to religion, it wasn't actually very intelligent of Maria Theresa to expect her to do this when she'd never given her any help or training or education in anything but being obedient to the interests of the House of Austria.  Similarly, Maria Amalia had the great humiliation of seeing her elder sister married to the obscure prince of her choice and given the rule of the Austrian Netherlands yet was denied her own desired prince and was married to a not very bright boy six years her junior, so again it wasn't unreasonable to suppose she would be rebellious.  I'm not actually convinced she did make such a mess of ruling Parma - she certainly ensured that her Austrian and Spanish families washed their hands of her, but both royal houses had too much invested to lose Parma by withdrawing all support so you could say she ensured she managed the duchy without interference.  She and her family were kicked out when Napoleon invaded, but so was Maria Carolina from Naples.

Yes, there's no doubt Maria Theresa and Maria Caroline were both intelligent women with good political sense.  But they were in the unusual position of women in the 18th century with politcal authority from the start of their careers, with no competitors, and they had the space to learn the craft.  Marie Antoinette didn't until it was much too late.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mary R. on July 18, 2007, 07:55:47 PM
Indeed! MA was called intelligent by her tutors but too lazy to maximize her potential. Maria Carolina practically ruled her country, she however possessed the drive and opportunity her sister lacked!  :(

Here's a portrait during MA's imprisonment:

(http://www.blastmilk.com/decollete/gallery/marie-antoinette/marie-antoinette-mourning.jpg)

Very bleak!

Mary R.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 18, 2007, 08:16:33 PM
Dear Countesskate, I agree that Maria Theresia may have to bear some of the blame of her daughter's diaster (in fact she was plagued by uneasiness about MA's fate around the time of her death...which before it came lovingly gave every child her final blessing). Yet if you read her report cards from Vienna, MA was clever but very lazy. She tried to get the easy way out of lessons and was never as clever and studious as "Mimi" (Marie Christine) or Caroline. Sending her off to France was politically sound, but not a good thing for the feather-brained Archduchess (pretty she may be). Maria Theresia tried her best with her constant flow of advice and Count Mercy to help her. Later on even brother Josef II came into the picture ( without his nudging, the petite operation may never have taken place !). So without help ? I don't think so. It was in her nature to dismiss unpleasentness untill it finally engulfed her.  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on July 22, 2007, 08:49:26 AM
Another thing about Marie Antoinette's situation is that usually the Queen's protection came from the sovereignty of the King. Marie Antoinette expected to be protected by Louis's position. She always ran to his Apartments with the Children during violence. Vigee LeBrun states that Louis was an intelligent Man...He just wasn't apparently a Leader. I know the Swiss Guards did protect the Royal Family with their lives...but I don't know the exact number actually stationed at Versailles. I haven't studied  the Military History of France  but for Louis to have organized troops that could have stabilized the situation..depended on them not trying to join the Revolution .ie. the Marquise de Lafayette and not had to call on the Austrian's for help...I don't know if anything could have been done that way?  ::)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 22, 2007, 08:05:51 PM
Louis XVI was a good man but no leader. Napoleon I once said had Louis been more of a leader and seized the situation, the revolution could have been over in weeks !   :o
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mary R. on July 22, 2007, 08:25:23 PM
Although he was a good man/father, he was not leadership material and possessed qualities such as indecisiveness. He was much better at the hunt and collecting stamps.  ;)

Mary R.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 23, 2007, 04:40:13 AM
Or making locks... ::)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mary R. on July 23, 2007, 07:56:32 PM
Ah yes... I'd forgotten about that one. It is perhaps one of his most famous! It's quite a shame, he probably would have been a good locksmith.  ;)

Mary R.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 23, 2007, 10:49:42 PM
Indeed...It was even hinted in the lastest MA movie.  ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: FaithWhiteRose on July 24, 2007, 04:38:09 PM
Louis XVI was a good man but no leader. Napoleon I once said had Louis been more of a leader and seized the situation, the revolution could have been over in weeks !   :o

That is what's wrong with monarchy: they always choose the wrong people
Louis XVI of France and Nicholas II of Russia are two very good examples.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 24, 2007, 08:11:52 PM
Problem with royalty, the eldest child may not always be the most able. In Asian countries, monarch select their sucessors by which they think it is the most able. More often a younger son was selected... ???
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mary R. on July 24, 2007, 08:44:38 PM
Nicely phrased Eric! :) It's quite a timeless theme.

Mary R.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: dolgoruky18 on August 29, 2007, 05:39:27 AM
The fourth surviving daughter of Louis XV was named Louise. She became a Carmelite nun before Marie-Antoinette's arrival in France. Madame Clothilde was the elder of Louis XVI's two sisters. She married Charles Felix of Sardinia. The younger sister, Madame Elizabeth, was guillotined in May 1794.

The fates of Madame Adelaide and her sister Madame Victoire after they left France to live in Rome, unable to bear living under a regime which accepted the Civil Constitution of the Clergy, was by no means happy. Forced to flee from Rome when threatened by revolutionary forces, they were nearly drowned in a series of storms in the Adriatic. Victoire died almost immediately on reaching land and her elder sister did not long survive her.

Louis XVIII had them both reburied in the Bourbon vault at St. Denis and there they still lie.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 29, 2007, 08:53:12 PM
I know a book exist of Madame Clothide...but I cannot locate a copy.  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on August 30, 2007, 02:03:07 AM
Is this is Eric?  B. W. M. Louis-Leopold d'Artemont has written a book on A Sister of Louis XVI, Marie-Clothilde of France, Queen of Sardinia (1759-1802). ...
l
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 30, 2007, 04:39:30 AM
Yes ! That is the one !!! The Sister of Louis XVI... :)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on August 31, 2007, 04:46:20 AM
 Posted by: lori_c
Insert Quote

But I STILL would love it if they could positively identify the King and Queen at St. Denis. How macambre, I know but curiosity...... Undecided
Quote


I agree....I would like to know for sure the bones or whatever in the grave is that of Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette also. I feel as strongly that they should be identified as I did the Romanov mystery. Its hard to believe with all the primary material from that era that someone didn't record what they did with the Heads and the child (son). There must be records in the Archives somewhere listing this information. Also who else was put in that site...
Madame Elizabeth....?  After reading Madame Campan...you cannot help feeling compassionate toward the Royal Couple! 
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: dolgoruky18 on August 31, 2007, 06:05:00 AM
Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette were both buried in the Madeleine Cemetery along with many other victims  -  including Madame Du Barry and Philippe Egalite, Duc d'Orleans and Madame Elisabeth. When the king was interred it was in a deep grave which was covered in lime before it was filled in. Apparently, very little was found when his body was exhumed in 1815. However, the place was known because a royalist secretly marked the spot with a tree. This was also done in the case of the queen. Chateaubriand states that little remained of her body, but that she was identified by a pair of garters. Her head was apparently strangely preserved. The Prince de Poix, who had served her in the Tuilleries Palace up to 1792 and who was present at the exhumation, collapsed in a dead faint on recognising her face.

Doubts still exist in some academic quarters as to whether or not the heart now in Saint-Denis is that of Louis XVII or that of his elder brother Louis-Joseph.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Lisa on September 01, 2007, 07:20:59 AM
I saw Marie Antoinette's hair at the museum Carnavalet in Paris: it's venetian blond (reddish blond). She was blond as a little girl then became darker, as Alix.
Women didn't wear wigs, only hairpieces. Louis XVI didn't wear wig, he had very long hair. They powdered it with flour, as CountessKate said.
Marie Antoinette lost some of her hair after her daughter's birth. She decided to adopt the "coiffure à l'enfant", short around the head and long in the back. It's the most famous, shown on the portraits here:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/53/MA178788.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fd/Lebr04.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ea/MA1788.jpg
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: dolgoruky18 on September 01, 2007, 09:39:25 AM
As one poster pointed out, wigs became fashionable  -  actually 'de rigeur'   -  for men at Versailles when Louis XIV started to go bald and started wearing one. Furthermore, the Court ladies, having noticed the King's general preference for blondes, began to colour or powder their hair  -  occasionally resorting to gold dust to add that extra shine. The practice spread to every Court great or small in Europe. Prince von Kaunitz, the great minister of Empress Maria Theresa, used to walk every morning between a double line of valets who would sprinkle his hair/wig with powder so that it was spread evenly. Talleyrand, who had the most extraordinary career in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, never gave up the fashions of the 1780s. Even, amazingly, Robespierre continued to have his hair dresed, curled and powdered every day until his overthrow in 1794.  The fashion did not long survive him in France, though. In England it vanished with the tax on it imposed by Pitt who was anxious to preserve flour supplies in the face of Napoleon's economic blockade. By Jane Austin's time ny man who powdered his hair ws ridiculed by the younger generation.

Marie-Antoinette's hair: a good question. Its colour was described by different people at different times as blonde, ash-blonde, red, pale auburn, sandy and strawberry-blonde. One of her 'drawbacks' in Vienna was the height of her forehead  -  a situation not improved by her Governess' habit of pulling her hair back from her face by means of a tight woollen band. Being made to feel self=conscious about this at Versailles  -  and insecure for so many other reasons  -  it may have been a factor in her decision to adopt a higher hair-style. Then everyone started to copy her and the results became spectacular and ludicrous. One lady who appeared at a ball caused near-hysteria when a mouse was seen to be nesting in the edifice on her head.

In later years stress and probable hormonal problems caused the Queen's hair to become thin and brittle. This may be the reason she adopted the 'back-combed' frizzy look.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on September 02, 2007, 01:37:27 AM
Quote
stress and probable hormonal problems caused the Queen's hair to become thin and brittle. This may be the reason she adopted the 'back-combed' frizzy look.
Quote



What do you think of the story that Marie Antoinette's Hair turned white overnight and which version? at what time? I do know its possible my Uncle's Hair did this same thing in three days.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: dolgoruky18 on September 02, 2007, 01:50:08 AM
Marie-Antoinette's hair apparently turned white during the humiliating and traumatic return journey from Varennes. Madame Campan, if I remember correctly, confirms this.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 02, 2007, 09:24:43 PM
That is a very good question ?  ???
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on September 03, 2007, 05:26:16 AM
I would like to see some pictures of Marie Antoinette's jewels. Not the infamous necklace but the one She inherited from Anne of Austria and the jewelry She inherited from Mary Queen of Scots. If anyone has any please post or send me a link.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 04, 2007, 04:59:09 AM
I think Sisi's rubies at one time belonged to MA... ???
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on September 05, 2007, 06:53:31 AM
I thought this was interesting as it adds to our knowledge of Marie Antoinette:

Quote
While the Regent Diamond was the centrepiece of the King Louis XV crown, and worn by him at his coronation in February 1723, Marie Antoinette, wife of Louis XVI, wore it in a black velvet hat.
Quote


I also found this:
Quote
The Crown Jewels were stolen in 1792 when the Garde Meuble (Royal Treasury) was stormed by rioters. Most, though not all, of the Crown Jewels were recovered eventually. Neither the Sancy Diamond nor the French Blue Diamond were found in the years after, however. The Royal French Blue was cut and what remained is now known as the Hope Diamond.

The Hope is famously alleged to have been surrounded by bad luck. Marie Antoinette who wore it was beheaded. Later owners and their families experienced suicides, marriage break-ups, bankruptcy, deaths in car crashes, falls off cliffs, revolutions, mental breakdowns, and deaths through drug overdoses.
Quote


Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: dolgoruky18 on September 05, 2007, 12:16:01 PM
King George VI of England presented his consort, the late Queen Mother, with a pearl necklace which is said to have belonged to Marie-Antoinette.

The string of huge black pearls, left to future Queens of France by Anne of Austria, the mother of Louis XIV are known to have been owned by the Woolworth heiress Barbara Hutton.

As related by a previous poster, The French Crown Jewels were stolen and dispersed in 1792. What remained was broken up, melted down and sold by a later French Government in the 19th century. What little remains is displayed in The Louvre.

Marie-Antoinette's personal jewel collection was taken by her hair-dresser. Monsieur Leonard, to her sister, the Archduchess Christina in Brussels in 1792. These were eventually returned to Madame Royale in Vienna when she was released.

As a young child I was taken to an extraordinary Jewel exhibition in Birmingham, UK. There I saw a diamond necklace which had belonged to her and a diadem of pink diamonds. I cannot remember who owned these, but it may have been Mrs. Charles Wrightsman.

Some of M-A's jewellery was displayed at Versailles in 1955, the bicentennial of her birth.

Who owns authentic examples today I'm afraid I don't know. 
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 05, 2007, 08:58:34 PM
indeed...I do wonder what happen to Anne of Austria's large pearls, that was presented to MA on her marriage in a lovely casket.  ???
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on September 06, 2007, 02:30:07 AM
Hmmn! that is interesting....about the Jewels that were owned by various People. I will look up the Hutton Heiress and see if I can find a Photo of the Pearls. I am relieved to know that Marie Antoinette's personal jewels went to  Madame Royale.

Quote
Marie-Antoinette's personal jewel collection was taken by her hair-dresser. Monsieur Leonard, to her sister, the Archduchess Christina in Brussels in 1792. These were eventually returned to Madame Royale in Vienna when she was released.
Quote


And that She could trust him....Monsieur Leonard to take care of her interests!

Quote
As a young child I was taken to an extraordinary Jewel exhibition in Birmingham, UK. There I saw a diamond necklace which had belonged to her and a diadem of pink diamonds. I cannot remember who owned these, but it may have been Mrs. Charles Wrightsman
Quote


I would love to have seen the Diamond Necklace!   Many Necklaces of the Period were cut in a Rose cut Diamond shape! I have also read about the casket of Pearls and also the Casket held Rubies I think. 
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 06, 2007, 04:13:10 AM
Those rubies plus the dowery rubies that her mother settled on to her (later returned to the Austrian treasury to be made into a parure for another tragic royal-- Sisi).  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on September 08, 2007, 03:27:50 AM
Quote
Her head was apparently strangely preserved. The Prince de Poix, who had served her in the Tuilleries Palace up to 1792 and who was present at the exhumation, collapsed in a dead faint on recognising her face.



I think I have read that Lime preserves....Have you come across any sources that mention souvenirs may have been taken. Somewhere I read that bones and parts of bodies like fingers were kept as souvenirs and that Collectors even today had such things. This would be of course wealthy Collectors.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 09, 2007, 09:36:10 PM
I think that is rather creepy... :o
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on September 12, 2007, 12:37:00 AM
Quote
I think that is rather creepy... Shocked


Yes, the French Revolution had a lot of horrible things that happened...gruesome....maybe this is what my History Professor meant...

During the French Revolution, Paris experienced a great church cemetery land grab. Skeletons of countless Parisians were dug up and carefully stacked along miles of tunnels beneath the city. from /www.ricksteves.com/plan/destinations/europe/relics.htm
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 12, 2007, 08:41:54 PM
I heard the royals wore buried in mass graves...was it true ?  ???
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: dolgoruky18 on September 13, 2007, 04:58:13 AM
The remains exhumed at Saint-Denis were eventually tipped into a common grave. Louis XVIII had them re-buried in a closed-off ossuary in the Abbey.

Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette were buried in deep, individual graves  -  although there is a mysterious three-day gap between the Queen's execution and the presentation of the gravedigger's bill.

Madame Elizabeth was guillotined in May 1794 along with around 20 others. She was the last to die. She and the other victims were interred in a mass grave. At the Restoration Louis XVIII made every effort to identify his sister's remains. The Commissioners were almost sure that they had found her body, but the head was never recovered. This has led to speculation that someone stole it and hid it for their own reasons  -  possibly for private devotion. Nothing has ever emerged about its present whereabouts. It may be in some cupboard like the skull of Mozart which was apparently found some years ago.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 13, 2007, 11:53:55 PM
That is really sick... :o
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: dolgoruky18 on September 14, 2007, 12:38:49 AM
Yes, I suppose from a present-day point of view, it is. But, from a Catholic standpoint it was not. Old Roman Law held that wherever the head was, there was the body. Nevertheless, I was personally taken aback when, on visiting Siena in the 1970s, I saw the preserved head of Saint Catherine of Siena in an illuminated cabinet on an altar. This, so I was informed at the time, had been placed there some six hundred years earlier in the presence of her own mother.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on September 14, 2007, 07:07:16 AM
Some of the Customs of that Day appear so Barbaric...for instance the dipping of a handkerchief in the Blood of a King considered a relic of some sort. I read that People did this to Charles I also. In the Letters to and from Axel Von Fersen this is performed by People after the Execution of Louis XVI.
www.geocities.com/Paris/Arc/8639/script.html




Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: dolgoruky18 on September 14, 2007, 07:18:18 AM
This certainly happened at the execution of Louis XVI. The motives for people doing so may well have iffered widely. Remember, the blood of an anointed king was considered sacred.

"There is a divinity that doth hedge a king..." : William Shakespeare
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 16, 2007, 09:54:01 PM
Yes...Blood Royal... :o
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: palatine on September 30, 2007, 09:53:18 AM
I would like to see some pictures of Marie Antoinette's jewels. Not the infamous necklace but the one She inherited from Anne of Austria and the jewelry She inherited from Mary Queen of Scots. If anyone has any please post or send me a link.

I don't think that the pearls and diamonds in this necklace ever belonged to Mary Queen of Scots, etc., but they once belonged to Marie Antoinette:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070927/ap_on_re_eu/britain_marie_antoinette_1

http://www.nationaljewelernetwork.com/njn/content_display/colored_stones/e3id62c2d8db8520f7aa8f06de4d8892109?imw=Y



Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on October 01, 2007, 12:25:40 AM
Thank you so much Palatine! Very nice...how sad Marie Antoinette did not live to reclaim those Jewels.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 01, 2007, 09:39:31 PM
Pearls were worth a lot more than those today.  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Imperial.Opal on October 02, 2007, 01:44:52 AM
 Christie's London expects them to fetch 400,000 pounds or $925,000.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 02, 2007, 04:46:51 AM
Wonder who will buy them...Pearls were considered unlikely for some. Empress Eugenie wore Empress Josephine's pearl necklace on her wedding dress, it proved unlucky on her too.  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on October 02, 2007, 05:39:39 AM
Quote
PEARL

Lucky

Only if you bought it for yourself.
If it is given as a gift, give the giver a penny for it.

Unlucky

Brides should never wear pearls.
To be on an engagement...These will bring tears...
Quote

Found the full quote on luck or unluck for Pearls!  I really like Pearls but I have not ever known them to be worn in a Wedding. ;D

Quote
On 1770, Marie Antoinette was conveyed to the Royal Palace and married The Dauphin" Louis XVII. Just before the wedding , Marie Antoinette presented with the beautiful jewels that belonging to a French dauphine. The collection included an elaborate diamond necklace which had belonged to Anne of Austria and jewelry pieces which had also belonged to Mary Queen of Scots and Catherine de' Medici. The large collection of gems was valued at approximately 2 million lives. The Dauphin and Marie Antoinette were married, with the bride wearing a dress decorated by large white hoops covered in diamonds and pearls .

According to Christie's , owner of Christie's Jewellery in London.Based on circumstantial evidence that the real owner of this pearl was the French Queen not to the Lady of Sutherland, Elizabeth Leveson-Gower. It were reportedly given to Elizabeth Leveson-Gower, wife of the British ambassador to France during the French Revolution, and were intended to help the queen if she managed to flee the country. Lady Sutherland is also believed to have guided the Austrian-born queen, her husband King Louis XVI, and their family in a failed attempt to flee France in 1791.

Marie Antoinette, pearls necklace was now on auctioned and made of rubies, diamonds and are expected to raise up to $800,000 when they are sold in December. It is to be auctioned on Dec. 12 with an estimated price of 350,000 to 400,000 pounds sterling (US$705,320 to 806,080 or 499,589 to 570,959 euro).   foreverjewelry-gemstonecollection.blogspot.com/

I didn't realize that Catherine de Medici pieces of jewelry were in Marie Antoinette's Collection

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: palatine on October 02, 2007, 07:27:54 PM
Thank you so much Palatine! Very nice...how sad Marie Antoinette did not live to reclaim those Jewels.

If the pearls did belong to Marie Antoinette, I can’t help but wonder why they weren’t returned to Marie Therese, Duchesse d’Angouleme, who could have used the money that they represented, especially during her first exile from France.  Marie Therese lived in England at times, so it would have been easy for the pearls to be handed over to her safely.  She would have been entitled to have them since she was the only surviving child of Marie Antoinette. 

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 03, 2007, 03:36:28 AM
She already got the diamonds from Leonard the hairdresser.  :)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: palatine on October 12, 2007, 10:14:28 AM
Marie Antoinette’s last letters can be seen here:

http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=289

http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=290

http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=291

http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=246
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on October 13, 2007, 02:59:23 AM
Thank you for the letters in French.  Here is her last letter to Madame Elizabeth in English. It is very moving and stained with her tears. Robespierre kept it!

http://teaattrianon.blogspot.com/2007/05/last-letter-of-marie-antoinette.html
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 14, 2007, 10:20:52 PM
He is one sick bastard...This Robespierre...glad he went the way of the King & Queen.  >:(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on October 16, 2007, 05:35:33 AM
Yes, the list of People that became active in the Blood shedding are incredible. I remember a History Professor talking about one of the Terror's Committee Members who was addicted to Death Saint- Just and so named the Angel of Death. I also remember the Marquis de Sade was let out of the Bastille during the Storming of the Bastille and active.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Axel_von_Fersen on October 16, 2007, 05:51:43 PM
(http://www.galleryhistoricalfigures.com/images/MarieAnt_court_Full.jpg)  I hope this words - its a picture from the stuart gallery  http://www.galleryhistoricalfigures.com/frenchfigures.php (http://www.galleryhistoricalfigures.com/frenchfigures.php)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Helen_Azar on October 16, 2007, 05:57:41 PM
http://www.galleryhistoricalfigures.com/frenchfigures.php (http://www.galleryhistoricalfigures.com/frenchfigures.php)

Wow this is very interesting, thank you for the link! They also have English historical figures and others.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Axel_von_Fersen on October 16, 2007, 06:08:20 PM
Helen A - you are most welcome.  Indeed they do - lots more French royals and many English royals :)

Here is another image from the Stuart galley that I like – the Queen as shepherdess.
(http://www.galleryhistoricalfigures.com/images/MarieAnt_Trianon_Full.jpg)


And below are two very sad pictures of Marie Antoinette - apropos to this date, October 16th.

(http://www.galleryhistoricalfigures.com/images/MarieAnt_widow_Full.jpg)
Marie Antoinette, as Widow Capet, on trial for her life – Oct 14-15, 1793.
The Stuart Gallery caption:

“HOW THE MIGHTY FALL!
"Following the execution of her husband Louis XVI, Marie Antoinette wore widow’s weeds. She was given the name “Widow Capet” from the name of the medieval dynasty which ruled France and spawned the succeeding royal lines. This portrait has her dressed as she appeared at trial.”

(http://www.galleryhistoricalfigures.com/images/MarieAnt_guillotine_Full.jpg)
The last above, Marie Antoinette en route to her execution on the guillotine.
On this date 214 years ago – Oct 16, 1793.

Here again is a link to this gallery where these pictures and the above caption came from
http://www.galleryhistoricalfigures.com/frenchfigures.php
 (http://www.galleryhistoricalfigures.com/frenchfigures.php)

Axel
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Helen_Azar on October 16, 2007, 06:18:53 PM
This guy is really good!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Axel_von_Fersen on October 16, 2007, 06:45:00 PM
Helen, this guy is indeed really good.  I like too the poses of the characters and the captions written.  Please do also join my yahoo website on Marie Antoinette where I have a huge gallery as well as active discussion of Marie Antoinette - her life, times, and images in art, caricature, literature, stage and cinema. LINK:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Images_of_Marie_Antoinette/ (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Images_of_Marie_Antoinette/)

Best regards,
Axel
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 16, 2007, 10:00:42 PM
Those WERE crazy times... :o
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on October 17, 2007, 03:37:05 AM
Quote
I have a huge gallery as well as active discussion of Marie Antoinette - her life, times, and images in art, caricature, literature, stage and cinema. LINK:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Images_of_Marie_Antoinette/

Are the Death Mask of Marie Antoinette the real thing? I see you also have a good Collection of Caricatures. One of the most shocking things I have come across on the Web are the caricatures of her and I presume Axel von Fersen! This was to present as common knowledge the idea that Marie Antoinette was a harlot.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Axel_von_Fersen on October 17, 2007, 01:12:36 PM
Thanks for the comments Mari.  I do have many caricatures and all art about Marie Antoinette is welcomed.  Which groups, photo albums and pictures do you refer to in terms of death masks and caricatures of the Queen in compromising positions with a man, whiohc you presume to be Fersen??

As to "common knowledge" that the Queen was a harlot, well... I do beleive that view was widely held.  First among the nobility and then the populace.  Belief in her loose morals fueled the behavior of Cardinal De Rohan and was a key cause of the Necklace Affair and Rohan's acquittal and subsequent further loss of reputation to Marie Antoinette

Axel
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on October 18, 2007, 03:13:03 AM
I hope I didn't give you the idea I think Marie Antoinette was a Harlot. I do not believe it. Historians I know have considered that Axel von Fersen may have been her lover, but if that were even the case, he would have been the only one. On your site I came across a Death Mask and I wondered if it was real and had been made at the time of her Death.  As to the shocking Caricatures when I have time I will see if I can track them down.  The Populace I know were very willing to believe many things of Marie Antoinette because She was an Austrian first and then her frivolous life style in the early years before She had Children. Many people forget She was still very young when She came to France.  It does not excuse the harsh treatment that she endured at the hands of the Mobs and at her imprisonment and trial.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on October 20, 2007, 01:44:32 AM
I cannot find the Pamphlets but it is just as well. This is a description and there were worse than this circulated about Marie Antoinette. If these had only been taken more seriously at an earlier date.... google books The French Revolution: Class War or culture Clash? by T. Blanning p. 37



                                http://books.google.com/books?id=KD0wVxs441kC&pg=PA37&lpg=PA37&dq=marie+antoinette+obscene+pamphlets+and+images&source=web&ots=Lq_XGsd2iT&sig=UM8FkAixJb5Pv2zccJ8A6OZez9w#PPA37,M1








Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 22, 2007, 01:25:52 AM
MA is no harlot ! She was a frustrated woman in a bad situation, who chose to close her eyes to reality.  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on November 01, 2007, 03:13:50 AM
I found some charming anecdotes on this site about Marie Antoinette:

Marie Antoinette found life with Louis in general and court etiquette in particular tiring and frequently embarked on various excursions. To the profound disgust of the older ladies at court, she often took donkey rides in the Bois de Boulogne.

One day her mount tripped and queen and donkey were both thrown to the ground. The queen, unharmed, remained where she had landed, laughing hysterically. Finally able to speak, she summoned the grand mistress of ceremonies, who presented herself before the queen with significant hauteur.

"Madame," the queen said from her spot on the ground, "I have sent for you to ask you to instruct me regarding the etiquette to be followed when the Queen of France and her donkey have both fallen. Which of them is to get up first?"

http://anecdotage.com/browse.php?category=people&who=Antoinette
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on November 01, 2007, 04:08:46 AM
poor Comtesse de Noillas !  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: russianlover76 on November 05, 2007, 11:30:50 PM
I was wondering if she had a brother and what ever happen to him
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on November 06, 2007, 02:50:38 AM
MA ? She had quite a few brothers (Josef II,Leopold II, Ferdinand, Karl & Max...)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on November 06, 2007, 04:42:15 AM
click on the link to see a picture of the Youngest Brother visiting Marie Antoinette and Louis XVI

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archduke_Maximilian_Franz_of_Austria

Archduke Maximilian Franz of Austria
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on November 06, 2007, 07:37:01 PM
Yes Max died without issue... :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: KaKu on November 09, 2007, 10:58:46 AM
Hello everyone, I try to find some libelles of Marie Antoinette (like pictures or just written), but I am unsuccessful
, can you help me please? It is really important to me :-)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: KaKu on November 10, 2007, 04:10:01 AM
(http://www.history.ucsb.edu/faculty/marcuse/classes/2c/lectures/06FrenchRev/1793QueenSerpent.jpg) There are some ugly pictures, but I don´t from what year they are???
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on November 11, 2007, 02:44:47 AM
You can find pamphlets in Chantal Thomas' "Wicked Queen".

For caricatures, maybe you'll find some more here :
http://maria-antonia.justgoo.com/les-portraits-f22/estampes-t95-15.htm
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on November 12, 2007, 05:43:39 AM
This is a wonderful site for Caricatures. Many are new to me....
.I wish these had been stopped sooner.  Personally,  I feel some of these are so cruel and they did so much damage to Marie Antoinette and Louis XVI.  But as a perpetual  Student of History though, they are important to study ...they explain so much of the cruelty that happened later.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on November 12, 2007, 06:38:12 AM
That's the point of Chantal Thomas' sutdy. You have to draw a line between the real Marie Antoinette and her paper caricature. Unfortunately, these propaganda campaigns were very cleverly made. So that the French people eventually believed that the queen was as shown on those papers. This was a way to attack the monarchy through his weakest link, the Autrian woman but this awful alter ego really led poor Marie Antoinette to the guillotine. Remember her trial ! They accused her of incest for political reasons, a terrible, a montruous accusation for a mother ! Although, they did it. And this accusation was possible only because of those pamphlets and caricatures, that already showed a monstruous image of Marie Antoinette for long. We can say that this accusion of incest proves how much these propaganda campaigns were efficient. Alas !
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on November 13, 2007, 05:34:35 AM
I would like to find the statements of Marie Antoinette during her trial!   Do you have an idea where I can find this?

 I also have been reading "The Last Days of Marie Antoinette" and it contains the Narrative of Madame Bault are you familiar with this and is it accurate? Chantal Thomas is something I will check out....

 Link to the last days of Marie Antoinette

http://books.google.com/books?id=5AowAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA150&lpg=PA150&dq=rosalie+lamorliere+servant+to+marie+antoinette&source=web&ots=VKS2wyDITd&sig=1jMKQSY4RdX_8rd9va65frOhVRQ#PPA193,M1
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on November 13, 2007, 11:49:07 AM
All those memoires are suspicuous because their authors tried to appear as royalist as they could, afterwards, even Rosalie Lamorliere's narrative must be read cautiously. However, I think that Madame Bault's testimony is quite interesting. I also love Chaveau Lagarde's notes on Marie Antoinette's behaviour during her trial. How clever and sensible she was when summarising the dépositions and discussing them with her lawyers !

You can find Marie Antoinette's trial here :
http://www.royet.org/nea1789-1794/archives/journal_tribunaux/tr_proces_marie-antoinette.htm

It is in French. I don't know where to find some translation of it...
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: russianlover76 on November 13, 2007, 10:03:45 PM
Thank you very much for the info :)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on November 13, 2007, 10:36:52 PM
We are all here to help & discuss... :)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on November 14, 2007, 04:02:49 AM
From what I could understand of it...Marie Antoinette is accused of just about everything! Her answers are very cool aren't they? They consist of No, and I did not know and very brief answers. Most People would get rattled and talk too much. I read that the Lawyer primarily defending her was assigned the case the night before the trial started at 8 a.m. He filed a motion to allow them time to look at all the charges and really try to answer them but the trial started the next morning regardless! He told Marie Antoinette they needed weeks to go through the Charges. 
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on November 14, 2007, 08:31:20 AM
That is true, Chauveau Lagarde and Tronson Ducoudray were assigned just before the trial opened. Chauveau Lagarde wrote about it : he was away in the country and had to get back to Paris at once. They both met Marie Antoinette in her cell and told her to ask for a few days more so that they could examine the charges. She first refused to ask those men who condamned the king, her husband, but her lawyers insisted, reminding her of her children, who needed their mother. So, the queen accepted and sent a letter. Her request was not accepted.

Indeed, Marie Antoinette's replies are very short and clever. The most famous one his her indignation when accused of incest : "I did not answer because nature refuses to answer such an inculpation made to a mother ! And I appeal ot all those (mothers) who could be here !". Even the terrible knitters were moved and felt solidare.

A less known reply is about a paper she was accused to have written for money. She asked when it was written. On August 10th, they said. Then, she replied it was impossible, for, on August 10th, she and her family went to the Assembly at 8 in the morning. How could she make a paper for money when she was imprisonned in the logographe cage ! See how sensible, present and clever she was, even so tired !

Then, there are her replies when questionned a few days before her trial. They tried to trap her with questions about royalty and republic, so that she would declare she was a royalist. She never said so, replying that all that mattered for her was the happiness of her son and of the French people, with or without a king.

When they told her that she and her husband would get back on the throne at any cost, even speading the blood of the patriots, she quietly replied : "We did not have to get back on the throne, we were on it". How clever and witty !
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on November 16, 2007, 04:12:01 PM
The Last Days of Marie Antoinette from the French of G. Lenotre
quote from the memoirs of Rosalie Lamorliere

Quote
When she rose in the Morning She put on some little low slippers and every second Day I brushed her pretty black prunella shoes whose heels were made a la Saint- Huberty and about two inches high.  Sometimes the gaoler was called away to see about something urgent and indispensable in connection with the prison, and at such times he left me in the Constabulary Officer's charge. One day to my astonishment this officer too up one of the Queen's shoes himself and using the point of his sword scratched off the mildew that came from the damp bricks as I was myself doing with my knife. The imprisoned priests and nobles watched our proceedings from the yard through a grate that divided us from them. Seeing that this officer of Constabulary was a good fellow they implored me to come close to them so that they might see the Queen's shoe near at hand. They took it from me and passing it from hand to hand, they covered it with kisses.
Quote


I found it odd that when Marie Antoinette was brought from the Temple that She had no other change of clothes or under clothes but had two pairs of shoes if you want to call the slippers that! It was not until the 10th day after several times of asking that She was given a change and then I do not find a mention of a change of Dress at this time? Wrapper? Does anyone have a scan of the Wrapper's of that time frame?




http://books.google.com/books?id=47kvAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA3&lpg=PA3&dq=paintings+of+the+nieces+of+cardinal+mazarin&source=web&ots=ZgjVhtJbUq&sig=5dk7kE1hFWik8j2qwUxA5f_fgqs
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on November 16, 2007, 05:57:25 PM
Indeed, Marie Antoinette had to ask for clothes. Didn't they want to humiliate her ? She was ill and lost blood. She did not receive anything for that. Rosalie had to cut her own linen to give pieces to the queen. And on the very last morning, Marie Antoinette had to undress in front of a gard, who refused to leave.

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on November 17, 2007, 01:23:08 AM
Yes, they did everything to humiliate Marie Antoinette! Rosalie mentioned in her memoirs that Marie Antoinette was fastidious and looked with approval on her clean, tidy dress so how horrible it must have been for M.A. trying to bathe  under these circumstances! If She was even provided water for this!  Other than the changing of linen on that final day,which the Guard insisted on witnessing is there anything about bathing in other Memoirs or sources?  I know that She did perform a toilette of sorts in the morning and at first I took it for granted they were bringing her Water and letting her go behind the Screen but I have not found anything to verify that yet.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on November 17, 2007, 04:42:11 AM
I really don't know, dear, and I also wonder, for it is certain that hygiena was extremely important for Marie Antoinette. She used to nath every day or almost and, if not, to receive "toilette sèche" (dry cleaning with scented linen), she even used a "jet de propreté" (a little fontain) in her water closet. Indeed, Marie Antoinette was a very clean person !

Then, she had these hemorrages... One thing is certain, she was provided with a bidet in the conciergerie, so that we can imagine she benefited of some kind of privacy to use it ! I don't know about her receiving water for cleaning or not... and even about her clothes, the testimonies are full of contradictions.

However, knowing where she was, in the conciergerie, and having seen her poor furniture, we are entitled to imagine how terribly this former queen was treated by the revolution... Humiliated untill the more intimate of her body ! I hate this so much !
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on November 19, 2007, 12:40:43 AM
It was hard for a Hapsburg to go through this... :'(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on November 19, 2007, 02:12:29 AM
Yes, I hate the humiliations that She went through also...and uncalled for...like this odd one!   :(

Quote
"When LeBeau entered the Queen's room for the first time Rosalie went with him carrying the soup that Marie Antoinette usually had for Breakfast. The Queen mentioned  pleasantly to Rosalie that She must help her with her hair and "Put up her Chignon." On hearing those words the gaoler ran forward seized the comb and pushing Rosalie aside said "leave it alone, leave it alone that is my business." The queen greatly surprised said with an air of indescribable majesty  "I thank you No"  then rising from her chair she arranged her hair herself and put on her Cap."
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on November 19, 2007, 02:16:02 AM
One more thing about the trial I read that they kept Marie Antoinette until four a.m. in the Morning and this makes her answers even more remarkable because by then She had to have been exhausted.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Imperial.Opal on November 19, 2007, 12:44:57 PM
 Marie Antoinette was a strong woman of substance and strength, during her last months of her life.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on November 19, 2007, 08:15:34 PM
I think she kept think about her mother and it kept her going... :'(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: lori_c on November 20, 2007, 01:41:57 PM
She certainly did possess a strength of character that nobody seemed to give her credit for. She endured much especially during the family's imprisonment and Louis XVI subsequent execution.  IMO she wasn't thinking of her mother so much as showing her strength as a mother, a wife and a Queen - some of which she inherited from Maria Theresa and some I feel she possessed on her own due to circumstances.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on November 20, 2007, 08:01:28 PM
All the daughters of Maria Theresia was proud that they were from the House of Hapsburg and daughters of such a fine empress. It certainly gave MA the calm and dignity during the storm.  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on November 21, 2007, 03:06:44 AM
The Countess de Provence, wife of Louis XVI brother hated Marie Antoinette according to a source I have recently read. Is there a reason? I have yet to find her mentioned that much in many of the Memoirs.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on November 21, 2007, 03:51:38 AM
One of was that she was ugly and childless and thus jealous of MA...not to mention position.  >:(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: imperial angel on November 21, 2007, 09:50:10 AM
The Countess de Provence, wife of Louis XVI brother hated Marie Antoinette according to a source I have recently read. Is there a reason? I have yet to find her mentioned that much in many of the Memoirs.

She was a really unpleasant person, and her marriage was unhappy, she had no children, that is all true. She was a Savoy Princess who I believe took lovers, male and female, or at least I read that in one biography. She was said to have had really bad personal hygiene at the time of her marriage- anyway, she wasn't a happy person and sources seem to say she was unpleasant. She envied MA the things mentioned.. beauty, children, position, even though MA didn't have a good reputation sadly, anymore than this lady did. But, with her it isn't surprising.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on November 22, 2007, 01:39:43 AM
And then there were those politics reasons : Marie Antoinette represented the alliance with Austria, and this Madame came from Savoy. Mercy wrote about it to Marie Therese... two princesses coming from Savoy, this was a little bit crowdy !
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on November 22, 2007, 03:38:28 AM

Quote
Mercy wrote about it to Marie Therese

Is this in a letter that I can access? or an Archives? or A Book? I know that there were many jealous people around Marie Antoinette. I looked through the Vigee LeBrun site at their faces and it is amazing that some of these people helped spread the rumors that led to her Death.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on November 22, 2007, 11:25:47 AM
I once read this. As far I as remember, it was around Artois' wedding. Mercy wrote to Marie Therese that he was worried about those two Savoy princesses in Versailles. It is possible to read all the correspondence between Mercy and Marie Therese on Gallica site :
http://gallica.bnf.fr/scripts/catalog.php?Mod=i&Titre=&FondsTout=on&FondsTxt=on&FondsImp=on&FondsPer=on&FondsImg=on&FondsAud=on&FondsMan=on&Auteur=&Sujet=&RPT=correspondance+secrete+mercy+marie+therese

The link opens to all these books, "correspondance secrète entre Marie Thérèse et le comte de Mercy Argenteau".
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on November 22, 2007, 08:46:07 PM
Wow !  :o
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on November 26, 2007, 07:31:07 AM
Thank you for the link but I have not been able to pull up the text! I have tried for 2 or 3 days....I can pull up the title and the index. I am using Adobe 7.0 as the Reader. If you have any suggestions let me know. I so want to read the correspondence......
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on November 26, 2007, 08:21:43 AM
I finally found this but I am not sure how accurate the translations are for the letters. If you get a chance Coquelicot give me your expert opinion. :)

http://marieantoinette1.blogspot.com/2007/10/marie-antoinette-letters-mercy-to-maria_28.html
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: coquelicot on November 26, 2007, 03:02:47 PM
Dear Mari, I am deeply sorry... I did not see your messages until today. I can't get those gallica files either, don't understand why, it happens for the first time... I guess you could "telecharger" (copy) those, then, but this method is more complicated, and the site you found seems more interesting for you. God ! What a discovery ! I never saw those letters translated in English ! It is just wonderful !

If you although wish to copy those gallica books in French, you must click on "telecharger", then, a new page appears, click on "ok", new page, you put you mouse on "en cliquant ici" and, using your right clic, you can register the file in your computer.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on November 26, 2007, 08:39:57 PM
Indeed ! A great source.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on January 09, 2008, 05:25:38 AM
While reading through the Youssoupoff site I came across the very interesting information to me that not only had that family owned Marie Antoinette's diamond earrings but other things. Felix Youssoupoff said this of his Bride's attire
Quote
We were quite overwhelmed with gifts: the most gorgeous jewels as well as the simplest and most touching presents form our peasants.. Irina`s wedding dress was magnificent; it was of white satin embroidered in silver with a long train. Her veil, which had belonged to Marie-Antoinette was held by a tiara of rock crystal and diamonds (Felix in his memoirs).

Again from the same family:
Quote
The center of Zenaide's world was her palace at No. 94 Moika Canal in St. Petersburg. Spreads over three floors were drawing rooms, reception rooms, and art galleries. A Moorish Room, complete with a central fountain, had been copied directly from an apartment in the Alhambra. Zenaide's bedroom, hung with watered blue damask, contained long rows of cabinets filled with her priceless collection of tiaras, necklaces, earrings, and brooches. The furniture in her boudoir had belonged to Marie Antoinette; above swirled a chandelier of rock crystal, taken from Madame de Pompadour's bedroom at Versailles.


I am amazed that something as fragile as a Veil from Marie Antoinette would survive to be sold and I wonder if there is a list of items that remained and could be accounted for after her Death. Has anyone come across this?

http://www.royal-magazin.de/russia/jussupov/queen-marie-antoinette-diamonds.htm
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on January 09, 2008, 11:44:16 PM
Quite a lot of the Queen's things were sold during the revolution. British buyers especially bought anything that belonged to the luckless queen.  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: matt99 on February 07, 2008, 01:51:30 PM
What was the reaction from the siblings of Marie Antoinette & the surviving family of Louis & Elisabeth to their deaths?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: NAOTMAA Fan on February 07, 2008, 07:20:10 PM
Quite a lot of the Queen's things were sold during the revolution. British buyers especially bought anything that belonged to the luckless queen.  :(

I haven't a clue if this point was already made, but we certainly now that Alexandra owned possessions of MA's, she became morbidly obsessed with the woman. In the sort of epilogue at the end of Antonia Frasier's "Marie Antoinette", she states the fact the Alexandra was overjoyed to stay in The Queen's Chambers at Versailles, its last occupant being Marie Antoinette (some people were unsettled by this and even saw it as a bad omen). I know I've read somewhere she owned trinkets of MA's and kept them in case in the Mauve Boudoir along with the portrait above her chaise. I read that even Empress Eugenie had an obsession with poor Marie Antoinette too, she had and entire suite in one of her residences furnished with Marie Antoinette's things (that I read in "Crowned in A Far Country" by Princess Michael of Kent).

But anyways, I too wonder this question. The Romanovs had such a list conducted by Yurovksy after their execution in EKaterinburg. Perhaps it is that the Revolutionaries were on a whole less care taking and never made such a list? I mean thats an entire palace to catologue. Though surely things would have been found and tallied up later....
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on February 08, 2008, 02:36:17 AM
Siblings of Marie Antoinette reacted angrily for the most part and at least two of them were involved in the War against France
 
Marie Carolina Queen of Naples and Sicily:
Quote
The Queen and her husband were horrified, and Maria Carolina used her uxorious husband to bring the Neopolitan and Sicilian armies into the First Coalition against France. Peace was made in 1796.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Caroline_of_Austria also of interest http://books.google.com/books?id=4CaqS7Eva_kC&pg=RA3-PR8&lpg=RA3-PR8&dq=Leopold+II+and+war+with+France&source=web&ots=9tzeaCxtB8&sig=u3nDeIEIL_0FcAptimnj62p9OK0#PPA6,M1

Another Sister: Marie Amalie  Duchess of Parma     very good thread on this already put together look under Italian Royal Families seven down

Sister Marie Christina who married Prince Albert of Saxony: When Antoinette was guillotined in 1793, Christina was reported to have remarked drily that she (Antoinette) ought never to have married. Christina stands testimony to the damaging, long-term effects of parental favourtism and the subsequent (and devastating) sibling rivalry. http://books.google.com/books?id=4CaqS7Eva_kC&pg=RA3-PR8&lpg=RA3-PR8&dq=Leopold+II+and+war+with+France&source=web&ots=9tzeaCxtB8&sig=u3nDeIEIL_0FcAptimnj62p9OK0#PPA6,M1

Leopold II, Holy Roman Emperor her Brother:When Louis XVI swore to observe the constitution of September 1791, the emperor professed to think that a settlement had been reached in France. The attacks on the rights of the German princes on the left bank of the Rhine, and the increasing violence of the parties in Paris which were agitating to bring about war, soon showed, however, that this hope was vain.  War was eventual and Leopold met the threatening language of the revolutionists http://books.google.com/books?id=4CaqS7Eva_kC&pg=RA3-PR8&lpg=RA3-PR8&dq=Leopold+II+and+war+with+France&source=web&ots=9tzeaCxtB8&sig=u3nDeIEIL_0FcAptimnj62p9OK0#PPA6,M1http://books.google.com/books?id=4CaqS7Eva_kC&pg=RA3-PR8&lpg=RA3-PR8&dq=Leopold+II+and+war+with+France&source=web&ots=9tzeaCxtB8&sig=u3nDeIEIL_0FcAptimnj62p9OK0#PPA6,M1http://books.google.com/books?id=4CaqS7Eva_kC&pg=RA3-PR8&lpg=RA3-PR8&dq=Leopold+II+and+war+with+France&source=web&ots=9tzeaCxtB8&sig=u3nDeIEIL_0FcAptimnj62p9OK0#PPA6,M1

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: lori_c on February 19, 2008, 12:01:09 PM
What sort of reaction did Catherine II of Russia have to this?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on February 20, 2008, 04:31:02 AM
Quote
The progress of the French Revolution damped all her sentimental enthusiasm for reform. The friend and correspondent of Voltaire and D’Alembert, and the patronage of Diderot, lived long enough to prohibit the publication of French works in Russia.
Quote
the Baldwin Project states that:
Catherine took especial pains to prevent the ideas, which alone made the French revolution possible, from entering into Russia. There was no occasion for this prudence. The great majority of the Russian people did not know of any world beyond Russia; most of them [193] knew nothing beyond the narrow horizon of their own village, and could neither read nor write. The harrowing tales brought by the fugitive French nobles did not tend toward inspiring the Russian aristocracy with sympathy for Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity.

Satisfied that Russia was beyond the sphere of what she regarded as pernicious doctrines, Catherine determined to make the greatest possible profit out of the disturbed condition of Europe. She never ceased to incite Prussia and Austria against the French Republic, but carefully refrained from spending a dollar or risking a man. She pleaded first her war with Turkey, and afterwards the Polish insurrection. She said to Osterman, one of her ministers: "Am I wrong? For reasons that I cannot give to the Courts of Berlin and Vienna, I wish to involve them in these affairs, so that I may have my hands free. Many of my enterprises are still unfinished, and they must be so occupied as to leave me unfettered."

While Europe was engaged in the hopeless task of establishing and maintaining the divine rights of kings, Catherine began a war with Persia. However even if she used this turbulent time to her advantage G.P. Gooch cites in her Book "the Great And Other Studies" that Catherine The Great had a lot of sympathy for Marie Antoinette and what She endured in the French Revolution. Gooch quotes that "She admired her."



Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on May 09, 2008, 04:32:15 PM
I found this link with wonderful Paintings of Marie Antoinette as a Baby  in the German School! The site includes a  photo of the  huge blue gray heart shaped  diamond  that She brought with her  into France.
Quote
Marie Antoinette gave the ring to Princess Lubomirska, one of her closest friends. At the Princess's death, without a son as her heir, her huge fortune and jewelry were passed on to her four daughters (three of them were married to members of the Potocki's family).
Quote
  the above quote is from the site.

I wonder why the ring wasn't sent to Marie's Daughter the  Duchesse d'Angoulême?

Also included is this Engraving by Fritsch from a painting by Wagenschoen, 1770.This portrait was  sent from the Austrian Court to the future Louis XVI: it's the first portrait of Marie-Antoinette that Louis ever saw. I know that some of these Paintings are very familiar but hopefully there are a few new ones.

http://www.ladyreading.net/marieantoinette/det1-en.html
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on May 16, 2008, 12:57:32 AM
I also found this beautiful Painting of Marie Antoinette wearing a canary yellow rosecut diamond necklace in the shape of a bow! Again more jewels I guess that disappeared at the time of the Revolution? anyone know?

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1372/882028398_acd24e06df.jpg%3Fv%3D0&imgrefurl=http://www.flickr.com/photos/64514569%40N00/882028398/&h=500&w=356&sz=134&hl=en&start=17&sig2=KPnGPLqppjYxU18vegjOTA&tbnid=jIIqA83CrpfExM:&tbnh=130&tbnw=93&ei=jBYtSIvlNZDQeZj_xbMK&prev=/images%3Fq%3DJohanna%2BGabriells%2BArchduchess%2Bof%2Baustria%26hl%3Den%26newwindow%3D1%26sa%3DN
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: CountessKate on May 16, 2008, 10:26:51 AM
The link appears to be to a portrait of Maria Josepha of Bavaria, Marie Antoinette's sister-in-law, not MA.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on May 16, 2008, 02:04:18 PM
This is an odd little site so search for " Life & times of Marie Antoinette." on the right and click that  from the previous listed link.  Or try the one at the bottom. Both ways hopefully will show the Painting.There are many treasures of the period in photographs and this Painting is one that is apparently only seen at Versailles   :-\ Below is a description of a bracelet but it is the necklace in the Painting I find very interesting.

Quote
At a time when the people had not yet begun to grumble and the avenues of Versailles remained the setting for strolls, parties and intrigues, our House created a bracelet made up of seven cameos and set with rubies for the queen. This rare piece charms and intrigues in equal measure : the finely honed ivory faces sometimes face each other and sometimes turn away, in a silent conversation tinged with eternity.

Given by the Queen to one of her confidantes when the people were sending her to the scaffold, this bracelet would pass through history, revolutions and wars, and be passed down from generation to generation.

Safe from prying eyes and covetous fingers, it today remains in the shadow of a safe to which only the initiated few hold the secret.
Quote

http://www.flickr.com/photos/64514569@N00/109251571/in/set-72057594107629448/

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: CountessKate on May 21, 2008, 02:53:43 AM
Quote
Marie Antoinette gave the ring to Princess Lubomirska, one of her closest friends. At the Princess's death, without a son as her heir, her huge fortune and jewelry were passed on to her four daughters (three of them were married to members of the Potocki's family).
Quote
While reading through the Youssoupoff site I came across the very interesting information to me that not only had that family owned Marie Antoinette's diamond earrings

I've been reading Bernard Morel's monumental work on the French Crown jewels, where he describes in some detail what happened to Marie Antoinette's private jewels (the French crown jewels were handed over to the National Assembly). No inventory exists of what they actually consisted of.  In 1791, they were taken out of France in two lots, both apparently by Marie Antoinette's hairdresser, Leonard, one lot to London and the other to Brussels.

The jewels sent to London were sold and the money given to an intermediary appointed by Marie Antoinette.  The second lot in Brussels were later claimed by Marie Antoinette's daughter, Marie Therese, when she was released after the death of her parents and aunt.  At least some of these jewels were sold shortly after her marriage to the Duc d'Angouleme, and an extensive diamond and ruby parure was purchased by her cousin the Emperor Franz.  The parure was derived from French crown jewels which had been given by Louis XVI to Marie Antoinette, and which she had extensively added to over the years.  It was completely remodelled when the Emperor Franz Joseph married Elizabeth of Bavaria; the jewels remained with the Habsburgs after their exile in 1918 and were either sold or stolen in the swindle which relieved the Empress Zita of many of the Austrian historic jewels.  A necklace  which was put up for auction by Christies in 1971 is considered by Morel to have a fairly convincing provenance, descending from the Duchesse d'Angouleme to her niece the Comtesse de Chambord and thence clearly to the sellers (although the provenance was not absolutely clear, just quite reasonable).  However, Morel felt that the neclace was unlikely to have been in the form in which Marie Antoinette wore it, as it was in an early 19th century design and so was more likely to have been remodelled for the Duchess d'Angouleme from diamonds owned by her mother.  The necklace failed to reach the reserve price and hasn't been seen since - probably broken up and the diamonds sold separately.

Bernard Morel has little confidence in the authenticity of any of the other jewels associated with Marie Antoinette, such as the Yuossupov earrings now in the Smithsonian - there is no provenance and the only earrings which Marie Antoinette was known to have worn bear no resemblence to them.  Similarly, the 'Sutherland' necklace (as it was at one time owned by the Duke of Sutherland) was purportedly owned by Marie Antoinette, but no provenance exists and there is no resemblance to any jewels she was known to have owned.  Morel is equally sceptical about the 'Marie Antoinette blue diamond' ring described above, supposedly given to the Princess Lubormirska by Marie Antoinette shortly before her execution; according to Madame de Campan, however, Marie Antoinette had very little jewellery with her in the Temple and that was not of high value (the blue diamond is a very large and impressive stone).  As Marie Antoinette was closely watched and guarded before her execution, there would have been little scope for securing a large jewel or getting it out and across Europe to a friend.

So basically, Morel thinks there's nothing left of Marie Antoinette's jewels which could be clearly identified as actually having been worn by her in that shape.  I suspect in the 19th century, any jeweller worth his salt would sell impressive eighteenth century French jewels to his clients as belonging to Marie Antoinette - whether they were or not.  Interestingly, Morel says the jewels sold in London in 1791  were identified as German jewels of an older style, so must have been those Marie Antoinette took with her from Austria and perhaps disposed of first because they were unquestionably her personal property, unlike the jewels sent to Brussels which might have been more associated with her French family in her view.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on May 21, 2008, 03:07:19 AM
Very interesting.  :) When the jewels were sold in England does Morel list a year? or  if any of the Money went back to the Daughter of Marie Antoinette, the Duchesse d'Angouleme from the English sale? Because the money was given to an intermediary appointed by Marie Antoinette... it would be great to know who the intermediary was and the year! I am so glad to know about the ruby and diamond parure purchased by Emperor Franz?

Also if you could are there any of these pieces that you could post?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on May 21, 2008, 04:53:58 AM
Just for fun I thought I would post this: 1789 Memoir in which Jeanne de la Motte gives her own highly slanted version of The Diamond Necklace Affair concerning Marie Antoinette.    For sale on EBAY for $500.00 I wonder if anyone can verify this is a reputable Dealer?

http://cgi.ebay.com/The-Diamond-Necklace-Marie-Antoinette-1789-memoir_W0QQitemZ110252047279QQihZ001QQcategoryZ29223QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem


Memoires Justificatifs de la Comtesse de Valois de la Motte, ecrits par elle-meme"

By Jeanne de Saint-Remy de Valois (Comtesse de la Motte).
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: CountessKate on May 21, 2008, 07:28:49 AM
Quote
When the jewels were sold in England does Morel list a year? or  if any of the Money went back to the Daughter of Marie Antoinette, the Duchesse d'Angouleme from the English sale? Because the money was given to an intermediary appointed by Marie Antoinette... it would be great to know who the intermediary was and the year! I am so glad to know about the ruby and diamond parure purchased by Emperor Franz?

The sale of the jewels in London was in 1791 - there's no evidence about what happened to the money or who the intermediary was.

My scanner isn't working, so all I can give you are some glimpses of the 'unproven' jewels:
Smithsonian/Yussoupov earrings: http://www.gimizu.de/sgmcol/html/marie.html
Lubormirska blue diamond: http://www.jewelleryvaluer.com/diamonds.html
Sutherland necklace: http://www.farlang.com/art/2007-10-24.6594787893/
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on May 22, 2008, 02:49:02 AM
Maybe the last link answered my question. Perhaps Lady Sutherland is the person. Apparently Marie Antoinette gave her a bag of jewels to smuggle out of France with her diplomatic immunity.  Thank You very much....
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: CountessKate on May 27, 2008, 07:27:33 AM
Quote
[Perhaps Lady Sutherland is the person. Apparently Marie Antoinette gave her a bag of jewels to smuggle out of France with her diplomatic immunity. /quote]

Lady Sutherland could hardly be the intermediary if she was directly given jewels by Marie Antoinette to smuggle out of France - the intermediary received the money from the sale of jewels by Leonard in London and by inference, transferred the money to Marie Antoinette or kept it - there's no evidence which Morel was able to dig up about what happened to it.   The Sutherland story has no evidence from contemporaries and is unsatisfactory in a number of ways - for if Marie Antoinette had no money or even a watch, how had she managed to save pearls and diamonds?  And even if true, what was Elizabeth Sutherland doing holding on to jewels given to her for safe-keeping, when they should surely have gone to Marie Antoinette's daughter?  If Marie Therese had subsequently told her to keep them, surely this would have become part of an attractive legend?  Morel discounts this necklace as having no provable connection with Marie Antoinette, and certainly the story sounds dubious.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: lori_c on May 27, 2008, 02:30:38 PM
Not to divert from the subject, but I recently read a book by Antonia Fraser regarding Marie Antoinette. It mentions that she is related to the doomed Alix of Hesse through the Hessian line.  Since these two women share many similar life events, could someone explain how they are related?

thanks in advance!

lori :)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Helen_Azar on May 27, 2008, 05:45:38 PM
I don't think I ever heard about anything about them being related, but you never know with the royals - they are all inter-related it seems!  ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Terence on May 28, 2008, 02:15:00 AM
Not to divert from the subject, but I recently read a book by Antonia Fraser regarding Marie Antoinette. It mentions that she is related to the doomed Alix of Hesse through the Hessian line.  Since these two women share many similar life events, could someone explain how they are related?

thanks in advance!

lori :)

Sure Lori, your post intrigued me because I remember it being addressed here before.  I tried to find it w/ the search function, alas even advance search didn't turn it up.  But, darn it you fired up the genealogist in me.

Many minutes later, the closest I can find is that Marie Antoinette and Alix of Hesse are 7th cousins, 4 times removed.  Meaning their common ancestors were 11 generations back: Philipp I 'the Magnanimous', Landgraf von Hessen, 1504-1567, and his wife Christine von Sachsen, 1505-1549.  Any corrections welcomed.  Anyhow, that's pretty far removed, centuries away.

While that is a curiosity to us today, I think the more interesting question is was Empress Alexandra of Russia aware of their blood relationship?  Is there any evidence of that, I mean actual knowledge, not just buying that tapestry?

T

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on May 28, 2008, 04:49:08 AM
Quote
Lady Sutherland could hardly be the intermediary if she was directly given jewels by Marie Antoinette to smuggle out of France - the intermediary received the money from the sale of jewels by Leonard in London and by inference, transferred the money to Marie Antoinette or kept it - there's no evidence which Morel was able to dig up about what happened to it.   The Sutherland story has no evidence from contemporaries and is unsatisfactory in a number of ways - for if Marie Antoinette had no money or even a watch, how had she managed to save pearls and diamonds?  And even if true, what was Elizabeth Sutherland doing holding on to jewels given to her for safe-keeping, when they should surely have gone to Marie Antoinette's daughter?  If Marie Therese had subsequently told her to keep them, surely this would have become part of an attractive legend?  Morel discounts this necklace as having no provable connection with Marie Antoinette, and certainly the story sounds dubious.
Quote

O.K. You've puzzled me! So you gave the link but you think the story is dubious...and intermediary means ...dictionary term: "An intermediary is a third party that offers intermediation services between two trading parties." So, Lady Sutherland  "does qualify"  as an intermediary to take the jewels and deal with the jeweler and then once she received the monies did she try and  transfer the funds after the sale to Marie's Daughter assuming the  link held correct information which apparently it doesn't! whew...I think I've got it... ;D
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on May 28, 2008, 08:16:26 AM
Madame Campan does mention that the English Ambassador, the Duke of Dorset had access into Marie Antoinette's close set of friends. Later  Marie Antoinette mentions that the Wife of the Ambassador who is now Lord Gower, had just given her a proof of the interest She had in her welfare by sending linen for her Son. This of course is Elizabeth Sutherland. (see link)

 Perhaps this is the reason that the story is rumored ....because of a friendship! Lord Gower left a lot of correspondence but I don't have access to it unfortunately! I did look back through the Duchess de Tourzel's memoirs and found no reference.

from The Memoirs of Marie Antoinette by Madame Campan
http://books.google.com/books?id=J9IQXVXdei0C&dq=duchess+of+tourzel+on+marie+antoinette&pg=PP1&ots=_VvS5g1wYp&source=citation&sig=vu_uMRordT3L2Z_YOA030T050aI&hl=en&prev=http://www.google.com/search%3Fhl%3Den%26newwindow%3D1%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26q%3Dduchess%2Bof%2Btourzel%2Bon%2BMarie%2Bantoinette%26btnG%3DSearch&sa=X&oi=print&ct=result&cd=2&cad=bottom-3results#PPA296,M1
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: CountessKate on May 28, 2008, 11:07:50 AM
Quote
So, Lady Sutherland  "does qualify"  as an intermediary to take the jewels and deal with the jeweler and then once she received the monies did she try and  transfer the funds after the sale to Marie's Daughter assuming the  link held correct information which apparently it doesn't! whew...I think I've got it...

Lady Sutherland might have qualified as an intermediary but the evidence Bernard Morel quotes is that the hairdresser Leonard took Marie Antoinette's jewels to London, sold them to a jeweller, and gave the money to an intermediary to give to Marie Antoinette.  There is no indication that the intermediary was Lady Sutherland; if she was the intermediary she would not have received jewels from Marie Antoinette, but given money from the sale to her.  There is no evidence that she did this; she gave Marie Antoinette linen for the Dauphin.  There is also no evidence that she ever received anything from Marie Antoinette.  I included the link out of interest in that the links to Marie Antoinette are frequently alleged but are rarely plausible.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: CountessKate on May 28, 2008, 11:20:48 AM
Quote
While that is a curiosity to us today, I think the more interesting question is was Empress Alexandra of Russia aware of their blood relationship?  Is there any evidence of that, I mean actual knowledge, not just buying that tapestry?

I haven't found any evidence in any of the letters or other information I've read that Alexandra knew of the relationship with Marie Antoinette, but genealogy was a standard part of royalty's education - it was what they were all about, after all - and she surely would have known of an even more poignant link- their common descent from Mary Stuart, another doomed Queen.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Helen_Azar on May 28, 2008, 12:19:37 PM
I think the more interesting question is was Empress Alexandra of Russia aware of their blood relationship?  Is there any evidence of that, I mean actual knowledge, not just buying that tapestry?

I don't think Alexandra's connection to MA was because she thought they were related as much as it was for the fact that she identified with MA in a lot of ways.  Like AF, MA came to a foreign country as a young royal bride to marry the heir to the throne, and both were later hated by the people of their new country. But the main sympathy she felt, IMO, was the fact that MA had trouble getting a son, who was then sickly all his life and died very young... Alexandra would undoubtedly relate to that...
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Terence on May 29, 2008, 12:23:49 AM
I haven't found any evidence in any of the letters or other information I've read that Alexandra knew of the relationship with Marie Antoinette, but genealogy was a standard part of royalty's education - it was what they were all about, after all - and she surely would have known of an even more poignant link- their common descent from Mary Stuart, another doomed Queen.

I thought I'd seem some reference they were both descended for Mary Stuart.  Do you have any idea re: Marie Antoinette's descent?  I easily see Alix's as Victoria's grandaughter, but how did the Stuart line lead down to MA?

T
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: CountessKate on May 29, 2008, 05:02:22 AM
Quote
Do you have any idea re: Marie Antoinette's descent?  I easily see Alix's as Victoria's grandaughter, but how did the Stuart line lead down to MA?


Mary Stuart
 |
James I & VI
 |
Elizabeth of Bohemia
 |
Karl Ludwig, Elector Palatine
 |
Elizabeth Charlotte, Princess Palatine (Liselotte, Duchess of Orleans)
 |
Elizabeth Charlotte, Duchess of Lorraine
 |
Franz I, Duke of Lorraine, Holy Roman Emperor, m. Maria Theresa
 |
Marie Antoinette

There you go.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: trentk80 on June 02, 2008, 03:53:53 AM
Not to divert from the subject, but I recently read a book by Antonia Fraser regarding Marie Antoinette. It mentions that she is related to the doomed Alix of Hesse through the Hessian line.  Since these two women share many similar life events, could someone explain how they are related?

This is how Marie Antoinette descends from the Hessian line:

Landgrave George II of Hesse-Darmstadt
 |
Elizabeth Amalia of Hesse-Darmstadt
 |
Eleonore of Neuburg
 |
Emperor Charles VI
 |
Empress Maria Theresa
 |
Marie Antoinette
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Terence on June 03, 2008, 12:30:01 AM
Thanks CountessKate and Trentk.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: imperial angel on June 06, 2008, 03:06:47 PM
I didn't realize Alexandra was related to MA not only through Mary, Queen of Scots but the Hessian line as well. Given that all royalty was usually related to other royalty, it isn't surprising. I'm sure Alexandra was aware of it, but it is true that that was not the main source of her interest in MA, it was more personal- After all, Alexandra was related to many other royals by blood too, and was not as interested in them. It would be interesting to know for sure though if she was aware, and what she thought of it.But there isn't likely  anyway to know for sure.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Helen_Azar on June 06, 2008, 03:09:41 PM
Well, really... given that something like 80% of British population are Edward III's descendants (at least rumor has it  ;)) - it's not surprising in the least  ;D. Technically, we're all related in one way or another!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eddie_uk on June 06, 2008, 03:36:56 PM
Does anyone know where I can find out more about dear Malsherbes who volunteered to defend Marie Antoinette? He defended Louis at his trial. He was guillotined with his daughter, granddaughter and her husband. Awful! He seems like such a sweet man.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on June 07, 2008, 02:55:01 AM

Malesherbes Daughter married into this family. She and Her Husband and Children will be guillotined.
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.rosanbo.net/media/photos/photo_malesherbes.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.rosanbo.net/rosanbo%2520castle/pages/history.htm&h=179&w=139&sz=10&hl=en&start=13&sig2=KxTT6RSWz2y7kbR3vEGV6g&um=1&tbnid=6PNKKq6JGmAXMM:&tbnh=101&tbnw=78&ei=Bj1KSPf8CoyaeYTSrdwE&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dlawyer%2BMalesherbes%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26newwindow%3D1%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26sa%3DN

La Comtesse de Charny
 description of Malesherbes covers several pages.
http://books.google.com/books?id=KDwOAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA401&dq=Malsherbes,+lawyer+who+defended+Marie+Antoinette&ei=TThKSKDyBKfSigGSqpDlDQ#PPA401,M1
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eddie_uk on June 07, 2008, 04:02:46 AM
Interesting. Thank you so much Mari! :)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Helen_Azar on June 16, 2008, 05:08:09 PM
Didn't want to start a new thread for this, but just came across this MA action figure. The head ejector feature is in somewhat bad taste, otherwise not too bad...

(http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll287/helenazar2/MarieAntoinettedoll.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Clovely on June 18, 2008, 08:48:59 PM
"I put on my rouge and wash my hands in front of the whole world!"
Expressing her irritation at her very public life as royalty. She gave birth to her first child in her bedchamber before an audience of hundreds of courtiers. From Wikipedia.

I guess you can say she publicly displayed herself sometimes, although I doubt it would go any father than putting on rouge and bathe in front of her ladies.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on June 19, 2008, 07:52:40 PM
She was always too fond of make up and dress and not enough about statecraft like her mother or her sister Maria Carolina.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on June 20, 2008, 12:05:55 AM
Quote
She gave birth to her first child in her bedchamber before an audience of hundreds of courtiers. From Wikipedia.
I guess you can say she publicly displayed herself sometimes, although I doubt it would go any father than putting on rouge and bathe in front of her ladies.
Quote

I don't think you can go any further than the first one...lets say there was no privacy at all!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on June 20, 2008, 10:43:26 AM
Yes...Versaillesis avery public space. The pressure to be royal at that time was intense.  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Norbert on June 21, 2008, 02:17:30 PM
not just Versailles....lets face it took Queen Victoria  to request privacy for her lying in
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Bourgogne on June 21, 2008, 02:39:53 PM
Actually, I've asked this before, but got no answer. I read in the Royal Diaries book about Marie Antoinette that she had to take her Austrian clothes off in front of all those women and get her French clothes. She also had to take her baths in front of other women. I know those diaries aren't very accurate, so what really happened?

I'm sorry, but it's a legend. Yes, it was an old tradition for foreigner princesses who married french princes. They had to leave "even a little ribbon which was not french".
But at Marie-Antoinette's time, it was fallen into inuse.
André Castelot, in his reference biography of the Queen, explains that this story comes from Mme Campan's "Mémoires", who, about this like about other things, made a mistake.
He proves that, when she crossed the anstrian-french border, Marie-Antoinette was dressed with a dress which had been brought from Vienna, and that she conserved with her in France all her austrian "youg lady"'s jewel...

For the bathes, yes, she had to take her bads in front of her chamber maids. But there is a point: she always was wearing a long flannel gown to take these bathes...
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: CountessKate on June 23, 2008, 11:42:11 AM
Quote
"I put on my rouge and wash my hands in front of the whole world!"
Expressing her irritation at her very public life as royalty. She gave birth to her first child in her bedchamber before an audience of hundreds of courtiers.

The point about giving birth in public was that the baby was incontrovertibly the child of her body and not a substitute (whether it was the father's was not subject to proof).  While it was horrific, it was something all Queens and Dauphines of France had to go through, at least with their first-born and a version of this was in place for a long while in quite a lot of courts.  Queen Victoria's birthings were not subject to anything like that publicity - a few ministers waited discreetly in an adjoining room, but Victorian delicacy caused her to request that they did not attend at all. 

The court at Versailles was the creation of Louis XIV, who managed to seize power from the nobility and invest it solely in himself by making himself the centre of all patronage and benefits.  To do this, he ensured that it was much more worth the courtier's while to come to Versailles and attend all the court functions, in hopes of being noticed by the king, rather than trying to seize power by force of arms as in the Fronde.  And to make sure that the courtiers had hope, he had to be on display most of the time - at his rising from bed, the levee, his walks, meals, entertainments - all of which were inherited by Marie Antoinette.  All the courtiers hated anything their rulers did to gain more privacy since this meant patronage was cut off from all but the very few - the 'favorites'.  Louis XV had small private rooms created in Versailles to be more private, and the courtiers called these rooms 'rats nests' as a sign of their anger that they had less access to the king.  So Marie Antoinette wasn't the first to suffer from the lack of privacy, or the first to create more private retreats.  She just moaned about it more than her predecessors.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on June 24, 2008, 01:53:37 PM
Well...She was the first to go through the humiliation of having a husband who cannot perform (esprcially one from the ultra-sexed Bourbon family).  :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: erzsi on June 24, 2008, 02:57:21 PM
hi, i know its a little bit offtopic, but can somebody tell me facts of the life of MA lady in waiting Louise Emilie Quepee de Laborde later Madame de Jarjayes?And id somebody know if there pictures still exist from her? thanks :)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: CountessKate on June 25, 2008, 03:20:51 AM
Quote
MA lady in waiting Louise Emilie Quepee de Laborde later Madame de Jarjayes?And id somebody know if there pictures

She was one of the twelve Premieres Femmes de Chambre of the Queen I believe, not a lady in waiting (i.e., not a Dame d'Honneur or Dame du Palais) - a sort of highly superior maid.  She was first married to a German harpist at the French Court, Philip Josef Hinner, who died in 1784, after which she married Francois-Augustin Reinier, Chevalier de Jarjayes, adjutant-general of the army. The Chevalier was one of the most prominant persons belonging to the Royalist party during the Revolution, who made many attempts to save Marie Antoinette.  Madame Jarjayes was apparently much loved by Marie Antoinette and involved in her husband's plots to save her. Before her execution, Marie Antoinette sent her a lock of her hair and a pair of earrings. After the death of the King and Queen, the Jarjayes emigrated to Turin, but returned under the Consulate and at the Restoration, Louis XVII made the Chevalier a Lieutenant General.

She was the mother of Louise Antoinette Laure Hinner, later Laure de Berny,  the friend of Honoré de Balzac. 

This is all I know - not very much.  I haven't any pictures.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on June 25, 2008, 03:29:32 PM
Did QA had correspondences with her sisters ? If so have they been published ?
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Ortino on June 26, 2008, 03:00:38 PM
Did QA had correspondences with her sisters ? If so have they been published ?

I haven't seen or read any correspondence between them, but I imagine that if she wrote to anyone, it was Charlotte. They were the closest in age after all and quite fond of each other.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on June 27, 2008, 02:51:32 AM
A Conspiracy Under the Terror is a great book to read and has many mentions of  Madame Jarjayes.

http://books.google.com/books?id=yjouAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA145&lpg=PA145&dq=Madame+de+Jarjayes%3F&source=web&ots=rGm7aQeWQ2&sig=iKQofTetuETbj-oOGqjVfqVvXgc&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=7&ct=result#PPA185,M1
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on June 27, 2008, 10:56:40 AM
Charlotte ? You mean Maria Carolina, Queen of Naples right ? Yes, shewas the closest. But she also written a last letter to Maria Amalia, Duchess of Parma. I don't think she like Mimi much, but still the Mesdames or Marie Therese did met this sister...
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: erzsi on June 27, 2008, 04:45:53 PM
@ countess kate and eric loew well thanks for the info and link, the book is very interesting :D
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Ortino on June 27, 2008, 09:57:34 PM
Charlotte ? You mean Maria Carolina, Queen of Naples right ? Yes, shewas the closest. But she also written a last letter to Maria Amalia, Duchess of Parma. I don't think she like Mimi much, but still the Mesdames or Marie Therese did met this sister...

Yes, I meant Maria Carolina. :) It's certainly possible that she also wrote to Maria Amalia--she was not considerably older than Marie Antoinette.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 01, 2008, 08:26:50 PM
Yes...the letter wasin the Italian book but reproduced in French. I think Madame Campan delivered the letter to her. "Mimi" (Maria Christine) was not afavourite of the French Queen, due to her sour humour and sharp tongue.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on July 02, 2008, 01:27:40 AM
I cannot find the source... when the last  letter was delivered to Marie Christine right now I just remember something about She said "Oh God then all is lost." The other Sister Maria Carolina grieved and 
Quote
The Queen and her husband were horrified, and Maria Carolina used her uxorious husband to bring the Neopolitan and Sicilian armies into the First Coalition against France. Peace was made in 1796.
Quote

Some of the last letters written by Marie Antoinette were to her Brother-in-laws. Jarjayes was to deliver these and small notes written on them from the Children. Interesting to me were the notes written to Jarjayes and transcriptions of others on page 132 on of the above link  provided "Conspiracy Under the Terror." ( my post on June 27)

On page five there is also an interesting description of Marie Antoinette by Senac de Meilhan "Marie Antoinette of Austria was striking rather than beautiful. None of her features taken apart were particularly good, but their Ensemble was extremely pleasing. The word "Charms" which is often used, was the real one to describe her graceful face. There was not a Woman who could hold her head as she did, it was poised on her shoulders so as to give grace and dignity to every one of its movements."
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on July 02, 2008, 01:48:55 AM
Under the thread  Maria Amalia Duchess of Parma page 2... I found this.....

http://forum.alexanderpalace.org/index.php?topic=4920.15

This was posted: 
Quote
Caroline, Amalie and Antoinette exchanged not only correspondence , but suntuous gifts, such as dressess, portraits, artists ... I don't know who was more close to each other and if there were some differences. I know, however that 1793 marked absolutely the queen of Naples and the duchess of Parma. they both would hate France until their last days and did, politically and personally in consequence.
Quote
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eddie_uk on July 02, 2008, 07:16:40 AM
Marie Thérèse wrote to her aunt Marie Carolina that her mother often spoke of her loved her more than any of her sisters.

It would be so interesting to read more of there correspondence. Apparently one of Marie Antoinettes last letters during her imprisonment was to Marie Amalia.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 02, 2008, 11:16:58 AM
Yes...I wonder if the corresponmces have survived (especially of Maria Amalia, whom we knew so little). The letters between the sisters would have made a good book.  ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on July 03, 2008, 05:26:55 AM
In "Marie Antoinette".... title continues on... published in 1903 by Brunier he quotes from letters between Marie Antoinette and Marie Christine although the Reviewer maintains there was none. 
from: American Historical Review
http://books.google.com/books?id=FpcLAAAAIAAJ&pg=RA3-PA803&lpg=RA3-PA803&dq=published+letter+of+marie+antoinette+to+her+sister&source=web&ots=HcULYbTsIF&sig=tCqEoZlYa_lPwlen0Bdb47koLxQ&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PRA3-PA803,M1


Madame Campan talks about the Queen of France receiving correspondence from the Queen of Naples. There is an interesting story concerning the Court of Spain and the affronts that Maria Carolina is receiving.

http://books.google.com/books?id=J9IQXVXdei0C&pg=PA151&vq=Queen+of+Naples&dq=+last+letter+given+to+Maria+amalia+from+marie+antoinette&source=gbs_search_s&sig=ACfU3U2ckFLJ1pHLGkOlHdqvPbhHX7YJRg#PPA151,M1

Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 04, 2008, 02:03:12 AM
Yes I heard both sisters recieved letter from the French Queen...
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: trentk80 on July 04, 2008, 06:16:06 AM
Thanks for the links, Mari. They're very interesting.

Marie Thérèse wrote to her aunt Marie Carolina that her mother often spoke of her loved her more than any of her sisters.

I remember reading that, after Marie Antoinette's death, Maria Carolina wrote that she considered her duty to take care of Marie Therese and raise her as one of her own daughters.

Yes...I wonder if the corresponmces have survived (especially of Maria Amalia, whom we knew so little). The letters between the sisters would have made a good book.  ;)

There are several letters by Maria Carolina and Maria Amalia which haven't been published yet unfortunately. I still don't understand why there isn't a good biography of Maria Carolina, since she was one of the most fascinating personalities of her era.
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eddie_uk on July 05, 2008, 02:27:58 AM
I completely agree Trent! Even the Lonely Planet guide to Naples has an article on Marie Carolina!!!!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 05, 2008, 11:12:57 AM
Yes...Maria Carolina badly needed an English bio. I tried to search for the Mrs.Bearne one but cannot find a copy... :'(

Indeed...I wonder where those letters are. I would love to research another article about those sisters... ;)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: StevenL on July 05, 2008, 11:33:48 AM
I tried to search for the Mrs.Bearne one but cannot find a copy... :'(


Eric, I have it and it's a great old book. Also contains an interesting bio of the Queen of Etruria, among others. There is a copy for sale on the net. I will send you a link to the book dealer via pm.

Steven
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on July 07, 2008, 05:19:50 AM
What is the exact title of the Book please that is by Mrs. Bearne? I would love to read it also!  :)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 07, 2008, 10:46:42 AM
Actually it was the wrong book. The right one should be : A Sister To Marie Antoinette: The Story of Maria Carolina, Queen of Naples by Mrs. Bearne. Hard to fine book... :(
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on July 09, 2008, 08:07:08 AM
This is by the same Author and has quite a bit about Maria Carolina. Mrs Bearne states that Maria Carolina intended for Madame Royale, the  Daughter of Marie Antoinette, to marry her eldest Son. Marie Antoinette however did not want the Prince of Naples for her Daughter but declared she would be better married to the Duke d'Angouleme. She felt that any Princess that needed to leave Versailles should leave by the age of seven so that she was not forever miserable. However She did like the arrangement of Amalie for the Dauphin. But of course the Dauphin died at nine. Circumstances changed all this. Interesting quote that many years later Amalie would say "She was always destined to be Queen of France."

During the turmoil of France Maria Carolina had gone to Austria to celebrate two weddings but also to talk to her Brother Leopold II about the League that was forming to fight "the Jacobins whose hands were already stained with blood." Maria Carolina was really pushing for the league and for them to do something to rescue her Sister.  Relations with France were becoming very tense and Maria Carolina longed to be able to break things off but of course they were hoping to rescue the King and Queen of France. The news of the execution of Louis XVI was shocking but the news of the execution of Marie Antoinette was one of the tragedies of Maria Carolina's life.
.
Quote
The tidings of the murder of Marie Antoinette came like a thunder bolt. The Queen,, in terrible agitation sent for her children and leading them into the chapel in the Palace, signed to them to kneel before the altar, where the solemn tones of the Office for the Dead and the sobs and tears of their Mother mingling with her Prayers for her murdered Sister, revealed to them the terrible tragedy. Upon all the Children this scene made a vivid impression, but none perhaps was so strongly influenced than the Princess Amalie who was just then preparing for her first Communion.
Quote

http://books.google.com/books?id=r0QQAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA240&dq=madame+adelaid+by+bearne&ei=zaV0SL_CNY_-sQP_tMTTCQ#PPA392,M1











Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: prinzheinelgirl on July 09, 2008, 11:56:29 PM
The book on Maria Carolina is available on-line for free. I have downloaded it. Here's the link:

http://www.archive.org/details/sisterofmarieant00bearuoft

Enjoy!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on July 10, 2008, 02:17:32 AM
Thank you so much for providing that link!  :)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eddie_uk on July 10, 2008, 02:04:01 PM
ooohhh thank you prinz! That's a great link and will enjoy reading it!!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 11, 2008, 01:36:21 PM
Thanks ! My long search for that is over !!! Thank God !!!  :) :) :) :) :) :)
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: prinzheinelgirl on July 12, 2008, 01:51:06 AM
You are all very welcome!  :) Hope you all enjoy the book as I did!
That site has many other books on royals that can also be downloaded. I got the book on memoirs of Madame Campan from there, too. 8) 
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on July 19, 2008, 04:54:22 AM
When the Dauphin died Louis XV, Bearne states paid very little attention to the children, but the Comte d' Artois was his favorite. The Comte de Provence was the favorite of Madame Victoire but Madame Adalaide's attention went to the future Louis XVI. Especially after this telling story!  Apparently even as a Child, he was slow, plain, dull and not very popular. After the Death of his Parents he found himself lonely in the crowd of Persons who served him with respect, but without affection, and one day, shedding tears, he said " Eh, whom shall I love here,where nobody loves me!" I think this childhood remark is very indicative of the reason he forged strong bonds to his Family after the Children came.

 Marie Antoinette certainly came into a volatile situation. Madame Adalaide and the Aunts hated Prime Minister Choiseul violently and he arranged the Marriage to an Austrian. Unable to prevent the marriage Madame Adalaide and Madame Victoire bitterly opposed it. When M. Campan before starting out with the household of the Dauphine to meet her at the frontier came to Madame Adalaide for orders she said "She entirely disapproved of her nephew's marriage and that if she had any orders to give it would be to not fetch an Austrian."  if Marie Antoinette had been treated like Marie Adalaide protected and sheltered, she would have been protected from evil influences but according to Bearne She was thrown into the most licentious Court in Europe; at which like her predecessor she had to occupy the most exalted place; but instead of being under the guidance of powerful protectors, she had no one to control her and the only members of the Royal Family that she could have one to for advice were the ones who were most hostile to her." When Madame Victoire realized this and tried to give several fetes in her honor.  But Mme de Noailles and the Dauphine's Confessor the Abbe de Vermond must needs interfere and raise objections. Madame Victoire yielded to the influence of her stronger Sisters and retreated.

Those who wished to injure the Dauphine and those who wished to help her but gave her bad advice seem to surround her. The Empress told her not to identify herself with her Husband's Aunts but to conciliate Madame Du Barry whose assistance she thought more important. Although M.A. became fond of Madmae Victoire to whom she would go sometimes as high as three times a day for advice she could not like Madame Adalaide who She was a little afraid of or Madame Sophie who was incredibly stupid Bearne states. Marie Antoinette had begun by showing great affection for her sister-in-laws but even there was mischief. She showed a preference for the little Elizabeth although She liked Clotilde a lot also. And then the Governess Mme Marsan pointed out to Clotilde that the Dauphine cared less for her than Elizabeth. The Abbe de Vermond mixed himself up in the petty gossips and quarrels, every trifle that happened even the childish games were turned into Evil. Prince Louis de Rohan, Ambassador to Vienna spread stories against her. The fall of the Duc de Choiseul was a triumph of Madame Adalaide and her party but a disadvantage apparently to M.A.

Sometimes it was a question of the grandeur and antiquity of their respective Houses that caused the folly! The disputes would among the young Princesses and their Husbands would take their part. Sometimes the problem would start over the attitude to be shown to Du Barry. The Comte de Provence took care to be on good terms with her, the Dauphin hated her as his Father and Aunts hated all the King's Mistresses. Two different Schools of Music were in vogue and even there were disputes. The Dauphine was a passionate advocate of Gluck, Madame du Barry patronized Piccini. the Court and City were rent by their factions, literary Persons mixed themselves up in the dispute; pamphlets, epigrams, sons and caricatures abounded on both sides.

This Book Royal Quartet gives a really vivid impression of how intricate and double dealing the French court was to maneuver through at this time. Very complicated for a fifteen year old. Many Historians blame Louis XV for not protecting her as Louis XIV did Marie Adalaide...it would still have been a problem with the unmarried Aunts supporting their own faction..aggressively too. I have seen pamphlets of Marie Antoinette...horrible caricatures of her, even sexually explicit before the Revolution but I have not seen any of the Pamphlets mentioned above. Anyone that has access to this please post...Paris Archives maybe? Worth seeing a caricature of a fight between Gluck and Piccini!
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 22, 2008, 08:26:53 PM
Indeed...I also wondered if the books on Madame Clothide (she was lucky enough to get married, even though she was quite fat) and the daughters of Louis XV made it online or not...
Title: Re: Queen Marie Antoinette
Post by: Mari on July 23, 2008, 07:24:44 AM
Yes, there are several that have Chapters or many pages on the Daughters of Louis XV. I just read a snippet of the Memoirs of Madame Du Barry and she stated that Louis XV did not feel great love for his Daughters but mostly masked it with kindness. I assume she meant he was not a Paternal figure. She also states that Marie Antoinette had been coached how to treat her and others by the Empress and that the fact they became enemies was her fault not Marie Antoinette's.

This one looks interesting also "The letters of Madame Elizabeth." have you read it? http://books.google.com/books?id=Ci1BAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA7&dq=Madame+Clotilde+and+the+sisters+of+Louis+XV&lr=&ei=2BuHSM36NKXmtgPQw8CXBg

Descriptions of the Daughters of Louis XV:

http://books.google.com/books?id=Vhov8isat3sC&pg=PA9&dq=Louis+XV+and+his+daughters&lr=&ei=iyOHSKe4OoSasgP06L2XBg#PPA11,M1