Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Bourgogne

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 9
The Habsburgs / Re: Help with Photo Identification, Question or Caption
« on: January 25, 2012, 09:13:03 PM »
Title says:"Unknown member of the Habsburg family" in the uniform of Lieutenant,second half of 19th century?Located in Stift Wilten,if that helps...

Anyone's guess who could it be?

LOL.... I knew this portrait and it was also a big question for me... Finally I think it could be Karl-Ludwig, 20 y.o., around 1850-55...

And as well as the (in a way) similarity of the faces, there is another factor : Karl-Ludwig was in his youth (1855-1861) governor of Tirol, and Wilten, where this portrait is located, is in Tirol...

Then... Not 100% sure, of course... But for me it's Karl-Ludwig...

The Habsburgs / Re: Empress Maria Theresa and her large family
« on: May 22, 2011, 09:15:42 PM »
Further to my post above on the possible Ferdinand of Parma/Marie Antoinette match, here is the exact description of her as a child/adolescent:

She was a very German-looking child. Lady Jackson describes her as having a long, thin face, small, pig-like eyes, a pinched-up mouth, with the heavy Hapsburg lip, and with a somewhat misshapen form, so that for years she had to be bandaged tightly to give her a more natural figure.

At fourteen, when she was betrothed to the heir to the French throne, she was a dumpy, mean-looking little creature, with no distinction whatever, and with only her bright golden hair to make amends for her many blemishes.

(Source: )

Also, I read elsewhere in this forum that she had smallpox scars on her face, which had to be powdered, which of course, worried her mother, who knew of the French King's (Louis XV) taste in beautiful women, his future granddaughter would not have pleased him very much in terms of appearance. Oh, she had  bad teeth, too!

Truth be told (and MA's fans would hate for saying this), MA does not seem to be a beauty at any point, whether as a child, adolesent, lady.

Altogether, not the type of girl who would attract Ferdinand of Parma, who certainly liked **very pretty and voluptuous girls** !

The overabundance of testimonies of all MA's contemporaries about her irresistible charm, is enough to reduce to nothing that strange demonstration, which would make us believe that MA was something like a monstruous dog...

Totally stunning...

The more harsh memorialists about MA's appearence say the same thing : her features were not perfectly regular, but her seduction was so strong that she would have been able to be prefered to all more beautiful women.

I don't even want to waste my time in a collection of citations, it would be to easy, and to long... There is NOT ONE testimony which reports that MA was ugly (that seems to be ridiculous to even have to write this....)

Maybe only two citations, especially about this inane story about smallpox scares on her face, when Mme Vigée-Lebrun wrote :

(FR)"Mais ce qu'il y avait de plus remarquable dans son visage, c'était l'éclat de son teint. Je n'en ai jamais vu d'aussi brillant, et brillant est le mot; car sa peau était si transparente qu'elle ne prenait point d'ombre. Aussi ne pouvais-je en rendre l'effet à mon gré : les couleurs me manquaient pour peindre cette fraîcheur, ces tons si fins qui n'appartenaient qu'à cette charmante figure et que je n'ai retrouvé chez aucune autre femme."

= "But the most remarkable thing in her face, was the radiance of her complexion. I had never seen something more sparkling, and sparkling is the word ; for her skin was so translucent that it didn't take the shades. Then I wasn't able to reproduce this effect like I would have loved to. My colours were inadequate to paint this freshness, these so fine tones which belonged only to this lovely face, and which I never found in one single other woman..."

And the "Mémoires Secrets" by Bachaumont, when MA came in France in 1770 (very important, because this chronicle was only a manuscript not made for a publication, and was very opposed to the french court. That's the reason why the first publication took place in London only in 1783).

Even this inimical lampoonist, who later was merciless about MA during the necklace affair, reports here :

(FR) "Voici exactement le portrait de madame la Dauphine. Cette princesse est d'une taille proportionnée à son âge, maigre sans être décharnée et telle que l'est une jeune personne qui n'est pas encore formée. Elle est très bien faite, bien proportionnée dans tous ses membres. Ses cheveux sont d'un beau blond, on juge qu'ils seront un jour d'un châtain cendré, ils sont bien plantés. Elle a le front beau, la forme du visage d'un ovale beau mais un peu allongé, les sourcils aussi bien fournis qu'une blonde peut les avoir. Ses yeux sont bleus sans être fades, et jouent avec une vivacité pleine d'esprit. Son nez est aquilin un peu effilé par le bout. Sa bouche est petite, ses lèvres sont épaisses, surtout l'inférieure qu'on sait être la lèvre autrichienne. La blancheur de son teint est éblouissante et elle a des couleurs naturelles qui peuvent la dispenser de mettre du rouge. Son port est celui d'une archiduchesse..."

I translate "skim through" :

= "Here's the exact description of the Dauphine... This princess is of an average height for her age, she's thin, without to be scrawny, just like a young girl not fully developped yet. She's very shaply, well proportioned in all her body. Her hair is beautiful blond... The forehead beautiful, the face beautiful oval but a little too long, the eyebrow as thick as a blonde can have it... Her eyes are blue but not dull, and they play with a spark full of wit. Her nose is aquiline, a little sharp on the end. Her mouth is small, her lips are fleshy, espacially the lower lip, which is known as "the austrian lip". The sparkling whitheness of her skin is dazzling, and she's got natural color (on her cheeks) so that she doesn't need to use any blusher. Her bearing is the bearing of an archduchess..."

Such a girl would'nt have been lovely enough for Ferdinand of Parma. Yeah right!

The more funny in all that is (the future) Louis XVI's word, when he saw the Comtesse de Provence (Marie-Joséphine of Savoy), her young brother's wife. He said to Marie-Antoinette : "When I look at you and when I look at her, I must admit that I was really treated like the elder-brother!"

And in another moment, the Comte de Provence himself asked to the Dauphin his opinion about Marie-Joséphine's physical appearence.
He answered : "Not good! I wouldn't have wanted a woman like this!"
Provence said with bitterness : "I'm very happy for you to have received better than me..."

At least Mathilde!!!! I did'nt hope any more to see her one day.....


Iberian Royal Families / Re: Spanish Bourbon Infantas
« on: May 11, 2011, 05:17:32 PM »
I'm don't even sure the portrait on is really her. As you say, MA is said to habe been unattractive and this girl is cute, and I think this dress and hairstyle are not very compatible with 1790 or even later (because this girl seems to be a least 11 y.o. and if it's Maria-Amalie that would make 1790...)

The dress looks like 1790's style to me, but I could be wrong. Perhaps CountessKate knows if the dress and hairstyle are from the 1790's.

I would have to say that the dress and hair in the portrait looks rather more like one from the 1760s or at the latest, the early 1770s - the stiff pointed bodice, the high hair are similar to portraits of this period rather than to the 1790s.  If one looks at a portrait of Maria Amalia's exact contemporary, Maria Christina of Bourbon Two-Sicilies, the style is very different.  This is the latter, portrayed in 1790 by Vigee Le Brun:

That's exactly what I wanted to say when I wrote that Maria-Amelia's little picture wasn't really compatible with the fashion of the 1790's, for young girls.

I was precisely thinking to this portrait of Maria-Christina of Sicilies by Mme Vigée-Lebrun, and also to another exact contemporary, Madame Royale (Marie-Thérèse of France, Louis XVI's daughter) painted by Mme Vigée-Lebrun, by Wertmuller and by Dumont between 1785 and 1789. Everywhere we can see this same type of dress (more or less a "gaulle", the trend started by Marie-Antoinette), no corset but a high mousseline waistband, and of course the hair without powder and arranged in low soft curls...

So, I have strong doubts about the little picture of by the way I've noticed that there are sometimes some mistakes in the identifications of this site - like everywhere else, it's true.

I think that the girl next to Infante Antonio in Goya's family portrait is Maria Amalia. Although she was dead, she was painted with the rest of the family as a way of stating that they still remembered her. Besides, it was common to have portraits of deceased royals made for their family. For instance, there were at least 3 portraits of her grandmother, Louise Elisabeth of France, which were painted after her death. Why? Because her family wanted to have portraits of their beloved late relative.

That's true. For example, in the famous "Louis XIV's family" by Jean Nocret, we can see Anne of Austria and Henrietta-Maria of France, and several children, who all were already dead when the picture was made. There is also many portraits of Louise-Elisabeth and her sister Henriette of France, who are also postumous, and so on...

I think that Maria-Amelia is indeed the woman on Goya's painting.

First because she's very close to Antonio, really like a husband and his wife.

And secondly because if it was Carlotta-Joaquina, why her husband wouldn't be there too? Maria-Louisa is in the picture with her husband Louis of Parma, so Carlotta-Joaquina should be with her husband the future Joao VI...

Iberian Royal Families / Re: Spanish Bourbon Infantas
« on: May 07, 2011, 07:14:21 AM »
Yes I've read that Maria-Amalia could be on the the famous Goya portrait, near Antonio. Some others say it's Carlotta-Joaquina.

I really don't know what to think about this. It's Maria-Amalia or Carlotta-Joaquina, and in the 2 cases, I don't really see why Goya would have painted an infanta dead 2 years ago and I don't really see why he would have painted an infanta who left Spain many years ago... It's absurd for the 2 solutions, and yet, one is necessary good...

Btw I can't really believe, that there is no contemporary sources from that time who could indicate us who exactly Goya had to paint in this portait...

I'm don't even sure the portrait on is really her. As you say, MA is said to habe been unattractive and this girl is cute, and I think this dress and hairstyle are not very compatible with 1790 or even later (because this girl seems to be a least 11 y.o. and if it's Maria-Amalie that would make 1790...)

Anyway thanx for the informations about her marraiage I did'nt know she wanted to marry her cousin. If she was hurt when he prefered her sister Maria-Louisa, I don't think that it was a good consolation for Maria-Amalia to be married, instead of Luis, to his old and ugly uncle!

Iberian Royal Families / Re: Spanish Bourbon Infantas
« on: May 05, 2011, 11:46:43 AM »
Does anybody knows at least a little portrait of Maria-Amalia? Impossible to find something... Sh died very young, yes, but there must be some portraits...

And does anybody knows why she married his old uncle Infant Antonio-Pascual? How came this strange marriage?

French Royals / Re: Impératrice Eugénie
« on: March 31, 2011, 08:08:09 PM »
Quien es? La mujer de Napoleon, la brocheta de Francia! That's what the duke of Madrid said during is trip to Malagua when he met the Empress. I think that was rude.

I admire Eugenia and her style. She was a fine violonist.

"La brocheta"? I don't understand what he wanted to say? "The skewer"...????

The Hohenzollern / Re: Kaiser Wilhelm I & Augusta of Saxe-Weimar
« on: March 29, 2011, 07:47:03 PM »

Mercy!!  How ever does one walk in a dress like that???  Never mind dance in one?
Just pulling that train would be an engineering marvel!!!


I've seen an amazing serie of little cartoons with comic comments about this fashion of skin-tight dresses in "l'Illustration", the famous french magazine, around 1875... Even at this time, they found that it was a very uncomfortable fashion! Though I find it was soooo posh...

It's a little off-topic with Wilhelm I and Augusta, but I'll post it here in a few days (with translations of the little captions), it's really funny...

The Hohenzollern / Re: Question about and/or Help with Picture(s)
« on: March 29, 2011, 07:17:24 AM »

I've seen this picture as "Clementine d'Orleans" (nonsense...!!!!)

Of course it's not her, but I don't manage to find who it is. I know this face, but... ?

French Royals / Re: Impératrice Eugénie
« on: March 09, 2011, 10:30:48 AM »
The Empress "en odalisque". Beautiful!!!

Her fan.

Amazing... I did'nt know this portrait... Thank you so much.

But I knew the fan. It was a gift for Eugenie, offered by the jewish most important ladies of Alger, when Napoleon III and Eugenie visited Algeria (at this time french colony) in 1860. They visited the cathedral of Alger (basilica Our-Lady of Africa), were received first by Mgr Pavy, bishop of Alger, but after that, they received also a delegation of the jewish communauty.

Here you can see the fan more well, with the imperial crown, the little inscription in hebrew (it's the date, 1860), and the star of David. It's really very beautiful (on the picture you can't see the sparkle of the precious stones), today it's exposed in Compiègne, near Paris.


From the recent exposition about Marie in Saint-Cloud (near Paris).

A magnificient full-length pastel (Marie in 1907).

Marie with Freud.

It was a fascinating exposition, with wonderful portraits, paintings or photos, her dresses, even her wedding dress, her toys when she was a child, everything was unforgetable! Even an amateur movie showing Marie with Freud and his family, unbelievable, I never saw Marie like this...

Unfortunately the catalogue is not very good, very incomplete, and with only little reproductions. And to take photos in the exposition was forbidden :-(

French Royals / Re: Impératrice Eugénie
« on: January 03, 2011, 07:01:18 PM »
It's true that the ideal beauty changes with the time and the culture, perhaps she was really considered beautiful at her time, but other ladies who were considered beautiful at a similar era are still considered to be beautiful... although beauty is quite subjective.
Well, about her melancholic eyes I've read that weren't considered by many beautiful.
Although this of not being photogenic could be another good explanation, in all her portraits she looks wonderful but on her photos not very much...

It's true that Eugénie herself was hating her melancholic eyes, and was always putting make-up on her eyes for correcting these "dropping" lids, because she was saying that gave her a stupid expression!

In fact what all contemporaries say often about Eugénie, is that all her movements, all her gesture, all her bearing, were a miracle of grace, majesty, and elegance... I would like to write here the rapturous descriptions made by Queen Victoria and by the Princess of Metternich about Eugénie, but I don't have the books here, I'll take them later.

I think that this kind of beauty can't be captured by a photo. A photo is just showing the face, and if the face is not perfectly regular, people just see that, and don't understand what is so amazing in this woman. That's why Eugénie's photos are a bit disappointing.

Only good painters can convey this kind of beauty. That's what Mme Vigée-Lebrun made with Marie-Antoinette (if you look at Wertmüller's portraits, he just was able to copy unimaginatively the features, not the grace at all, and Marie-Antoinette is rather ugly on these portraits).

What Vigée-Lebrun made with Marie-Antoinette, Winterhalter (above all) made it for Eugénie... If we want to understand what Eugénie was, we have to look Winterhalter more than her photos.

But as far I'm concerned, I must confess that I find her beautiful even on the photos... More interesting than Sissi, who was perfectly lovely, but (IMO) icy, frosty... I know that a lot of people won't be ok with me about it... but as you say, all is so much subjective about beauty...

French Royals / Re: Identification,please
« on: January 02, 2011, 02:19:47 PM »

I guess someone will reveal the truth...Thank you for this information...There is also another speculation about this image:

Sometimes it's labeled as Marie Anne de Bourbon-Conde and sometimes as Caroline von Hessen-Rheinfels-Rotenburg...who is it in the end?

Thank you Burgogne for finally identifying the Painting! That was quite a little mystery and explains a lot about the confusion if both of the other Paintings were the same Person!  Smiley

Marc I had noticed too this other speculation, and also checked it with the musée Condé de Chantilly : it's definitively Marie-Anne de Bourbon-Condé, not Caroline de Hesse-Rhinfels! is wrong, for once...

Mari you're welcome ;-)

French Royals / Re: Impératrice Eugénie
« on: January 02, 2011, 02:00:13 PM »

Howewer many people described her as a perfect statue with classic features and said she had a splendid face even when she was old. I think that Eugénie for her contemporaries wasn't lovely, but reallyl beautiful. Looking her photos, I see a splendid woman with an ancient beauty: an important and chiseled nose, melancholy eyes, beautiful shoulders, hands and feet (details very important in the past). And how we know by descriptions, she has beautiful and white teeth and she was extremely graceful (her bows were unforgettable: do you remember someone?). In my opinion Eugénie was the last icon of the imperial idea of beauty: she had many features in common with Marie-Antoinette, Mary Queen of Scots etc... and Sisi was the first icon of the new idea of beauty.
We cannot exclude the possibility that she was not photogenic: I really know a lot of beautiful girls (or boys) that in photos are just nice!

Really *§Yue§* you said exactly what I wanted to say. Eugénie was not lovely or pretty if what we call pretty is Kate Moss ou Kim Kardashian or Angelina Jolie or I don't know who in this type...
Eugénie had an antique beauty, like a greek or roman bust, stately and statuesque, which was (and is still in my opinion) the true beauty a sovereign must have.
The most fascinating women are often in this case. Not really pretty, ok. But more : bewitching...
As you said it, Marie-Antoinette, Mary Stuart were not "lovely" either.
Grand-duchess Ella or Queen Margherita of Italy were not pretty either.
Lady Diana was not pretty either, with her big nose and her irregular features.
And yet...!

French Royals / Re: Identification,please
« on: January 01, 2011, 08:20:31 PM »
Trying again...

Well, this portrait by Drouais was former supposed to be Charlotte-Godefride de Rohan, princesse de Condé.

But it was a false identification.

It's Marie-Louise-Elisabeth de Maillé, comtesse de Sorans (1742-1812). She was lady in waiting of Madame Clotilde and later of Madame Elisabeth, the two sisters of Louis XVI... The portrait was made in 1763, she was 21 y.o.
Original version - the version you have is a copy, a little clumsy ;-)


By the way, there is one other point :

- "Here is Caroline of Hesse- Rotenburg,_Landgr%C3%A4fin_von_Hessen-Rheinfels-Rotenburg.jpg
and here is Charlotte Elizabeth de Rohan"

- "You got right to the problem. Karoline and Charlotte-Élisabeth look similar."

There is a reason for this : the portrait shown as Charlotte de Rohan on wikipédia, is not her, but Caroline of Hesse-Rotenburg... The old inscription on the picture is a mistake. It's the curator of the musée Condé of Chantilly, Nicole Garnier-Pelle, who wrote me this information...

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 9