King Louis XVI (1754-1793) and Queen Marie Antoinette (1755-1793)

[Thribette]

Madame Campan became "instructor" for Napoléon' sisters, who were much unaware of étiquette, and to please her new lord, she was very hard with Marie-Antoinette in her memories. Her memories are, among written memories, the ones of the person closer to her, but are not so reliable for this reason (would she have kept loyal, her memories would have been suspicious for the opposite reason...)
Marie-Antoinette committed faults as a Dauphine and at the beginning of her reign. She refused her marital duties for 11 years, until her brother, who had become emperor, came unofficially and blame her, because she had written to her mother (who was far too intrusive, and was named "mater absoluta") that the non-consomption of marriage was due to a bad conformation of Louis XVI, while she was simply afraid of her straightness, and didn't do anything to resolve it. She refused to consider all serious questions in general. Of course, when she had children, she was a very tender, loving mother, as she was very kind (and, Furienna, the contact with the poor and helping them, was very natural to her, she was a very loving nature, very simple, she knew to find the right words...) but still considered badly her husband, that she judged poorly minded because she remained far from him and listened to her little court!
Later, during the Revolution, she understood her misjudgement, as her husband was very strong and wise and reliable, and she tried to interest herself to politics, but it was too late, it was no more time for formation.
I think she was conscious of her faults. Would another behaviour of her avoided Revolution? Not sure. Anyway, she felt very guilty and her husband put her at rest (cf his testament). Once jailed, she became litterally perfect!

[Axel]

Today, October 16, 2007 is the anniversary date of Marie Antoinette's execution. 214 years ago, this dethroned "last Queen of France" was bound and carted to the scaffold, scorned by thousands of her former subjects and then beheaded in a public execution.

Thinking of Her and the awful fate she met on this date in 1793, I thought of the words of 19th c. English novelist Charles Dickens when he wrote of her execution in the Tale of Two Cities:

"Now, breaking the unnatural silence of a whole city, the executioner
showed the people the head of the king- and now, it seemed almost in
the same breath, the head of his fair wife which had had eight weary
months of imprisoned widowhood and misery, to turn it grey.

I quoted this passage and others from Dickens in three Oct. 16, 2007 posts to my yahoo MA group. In his elegant prose, Dickens, for me, well tells the incredible journey Marie Antoinette traveled from the pinnacle of European society to the tumbril and guillotine. LINK:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Images_of_Marie_Antoinette/

Axel

[carlota]

i truly enjoyed sofia coppola's film on marie antoinette. i watched it twice already, and don't seem to get enough. costumes and make up are superb. did anyone else see it or has an opinion about it? i heard so many different opinions!

i found it delightful. extremely beautiful (no wonder, when it was filmed in versailles and with that budget!) and quite a sensory treat. some performances are great as well, imo. quite sad it finishes just after they leave versailles, i would have loved to see a bit more, perhaps she could have continued with her imprisonment at la conciergerie? (although i understand maybe this would detract from the splendid and lavish kind of film she wanted to do, but would maybe add some more essence)

[Madame Royale]

Bought it on DVD the day it was released and have notably watched it no less than say, 3 times. A truly tantalizing sensory treat.

Costume design was exquisite...I mean TOTALLY exquisite both historically and aesthetically. Many fabrics used for the costume production were supplied by the same 'house' who supply a great deal of fabric to the Spanish Royal Family. Given the Bourbon connection, I found that appropriate, if not complimentary to the film.

[Avalon]

You will find more information about the movie and our members' reaction to it in this thread - The movie "Marie-Antoinette" .

[bgnparisgurl]

To me, nothing is 100% accurate...It's like a million people standing in a line, and one person says something, and then passes it down, and by the time it get's to the last person in line, the message is completely different then from the beginning. There are probably a lot of other facts that we do not know about Marie Antoinette, enless it comes from the horses mouth, I do not say a thing.

[bgnparisgurl]

Marie Antoinette was very giving. She did give food to the people in need, she did let peasants stay in the cottages that she had built, she did acknowledge that there were people who had way less then her, she did cut back on expenses as she got older, she did hide behind her palace walls, she did ignore the mobs and horrible pornographic pamphlets that were passed out everywhere about her and lesbian acts, she did have a love affair with the Count Axel Fersen (whom showed her real love), she was misunderstood (if she wasnt Austrian, things would've been much different), she was not the brightest of Queens in my opinion but something about her has us still talking about her today, was it her tragic death? Her up and down rollercoaster ride life? The fact that she was so hated by the French; how could someone be so hated? And so fast? I think a huge problem was the fact that she ignored her people. She did not pay attention to what they were wanting. You have to ask, you have to show concern, and she did neither. She sat inside of those palace walls, and ignored everything that was going on around her. A good Queen would've acknowledged it and took immediate action, even if it meant speaking to the people directly. She just thought that by dressing less extravagent, selling some of her gems, sending some food to the people would show them, but the truth is, most of the people had no idea that she had sold some of jewelry, the people didnt TRUTHFULLY know was going on, they just thought she was having parties, buying clothes, and building buildings (which she was, quite expesnive little whimsacale land with lambs and cottages)........The communication in my opinion would've helped somewhat. King Louis XVI even sat back, just going to bed eating bon bons with no care in the world, he just thought that people would still obey him, bow to him, because he would always be King and nothing would change. People thought it was just a phase, that it was just come and go.....However, about the French citizens themselves, that's just darn right crazy. There have been really bad times in a lot of countries, but you didnt see them killing their own people, and sticking their heads on pikes. I think the French against the French was bad enough.And then Marie and Louis trying to escape in a carriage that was fit for royalty? How would anyone possibly notice that carriage? I am not dogging them whatsoever, but their decisions were not the wisest. They did help the French though. Marie Antoinette did not commit treason, well she did but behind their back and no one knew about it, however they exploited that at her trial saying treason was her reason and then having several gentlemen get up and speak about the pornographic pamphlets; that had nothing to do with the trial. She did commit treason though, but no one knew about it except mostly her family in Austria, towards the end she wanted Austria to attack the French. Marie was very quiet during this trial, I think she had no more strength, her children were taken from her, her husband was killer, what else is there really to live for? Everyone wanted her dead, she a long ways from home, she had tried escaping, she had seen people murdered, she had been called every name in the book..She had no other defense at the time in trial. In my opinion THE french killed the king and the queen of their country, and that is sad sad. Death should not have been the answer. There are other alternatives........Their reasoning for wanting them dead were for the wrong reasons.

[ashelen]

Originally Posted by bgnparisgurl

Marie Antoinette was very giving. She did give food to the people in need, she did let peasants stay in the cottages that she had built, she did acknowledge that there were people who had way less then her, she did cut back on expenses as she got older, she did hide behind her palace walls, she did ignore the mobs and horrible pornographic pamphlets that were passed out everywhere about her and lesbian acts, she did have a love affair with the Count Axel Fersen (whom showed her real love), she was misunderstood (if she wasnt Austrian, things would've been much different), she was not the brightest of Queens in my opinion but something about her has us still talking about her today, was it her tragic death? Her up and down rollercoaster ride life? The fact that she was so hated by the French; how could someone be so hated? And so fast? I think a huge problem was the fact that she ignored her people. She did not pay attention to what they were wanting. You have to ask, you have to show concern, and she did neither. She sat inside of those palace walls, and ignored everything that was going on around her. A good Queen would've acknowledged it and took immediate action, even if it meant speaking to the people directly. She just thought that by dressing less extravagent, selling some of her gems, sending some food to the people would show them, but the truth is, most of the people had no idea that she had sold some of jewelry, the people didnt TRUTHFULLY know was going on, they just thought she was having parties, buying clothes, and building buildings (which she was, quite expesnive little whimsacale land with lambs and cottages)........The communication in my opinion would've helped somewhat. King Louis XVI even sat back, just going to bed eating bon bons with no care in the world, he just thought that people would still obey him, bow to him, because he would always be King and nothing would change. People thought it was just a phase, that it was just come and go.....However, about the French citizens themselves, that's just darn right crazy. There have been really bad times in a lot of countries, but you didnt see them killing their own people, and sticking their heads on pikes. I think the French against the French was bad enough.And then Marie and Louis trying to escape in a carriage that was fit for royalty? How would anyone possibly notice that carriage? I am not dogging them whatsoever, but their decisions were not the wisest. They did help the French though. Marie Antoinette did not commit treason, well she did but behind their back and no one knew about it, however they exploited that at her trial saying treason was her reason and then having several gentlemen get up and speak about the pornographic pamphlets; that had nothing to do with the trial. She did commit treason though, but no one knew about it except mostly her family in Austria, towards the end she wanted Austria to attack the French. Marie was very quiet during this trial, I think she had no more strength, her children were taken from her, her husband was killer, what else is there really to live for? Everyone wanted her dead, she a long ways from home, she had tried escaping, she had seen people murdered, she had been called every name in the book..She had no other defense at the time in trial. In my opinion THE french killed the king and the queen of their country, and that is sad sad. Death should not have been the answer. There are other alternatives........Their reasoning for wanting them dead were for the wrong reasons.

really a tragedy, i agree with you!
but anyones knows why the aughter had never kids? did they make sure she wouldnt have decents?

[bgnparisgurl]

I often wondered that too. I mean I am sure her daughter was capable of having children, and to have descendents still alive in this time period would've been truly interesting. I wonder why they let the little girl go, and her youngest son?

[Avalon]

Marie-Therese was allowed to leave France for several reasons:

1) Women could not succeed to the Throne of France, so her existence was no threat fo anyone
2) The so called 'Reign of Terror', or the Robespierre era, was over. The French public and authorities wanted to distance themselves as much as possible from the pre-1793 times, and all the terrifying acts done at the time. Marie Therese's parents, her brother and aunt were all dead, there was no point in keeping her in prison and executing her would cause further outrage
3) The Austrian Emperor, and basically all European countries, demanded Marie-Therese's return. The was the last living child of King Louis XVI and Queen Marie Antoinette, and thus was a symbol for the Monarchiest movement.

It is likely that even if Marie Teresa could herself have children, her husband, Louis-Antoine couldn't.
If they did have children, I think they would be strong claimants fo the French Throne (in our times, that is), because even though Louis-Antoine did abdicate 20 minutes after becoming a King, any child of the only surviving child of Louis XVI & Marie Antoinette, and the heir of Louis XVIII would probably enjoy much more popularity and would have much stronger claims then any of the current pretenders.

[Thribette]

If the dukes of Angoulême had had a male descent, the elder of them would not be a "claimant", but simply de jure king of France.

[lucien]

Staues of King Louis XVI and Queen Marie Antoinette,Basilique St.Denis.
http://www.royaltyguide.nl/images-co...stdenis/71.JPG
Courtesy dear Marianne van Dam/Mardam.