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


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Thank you for that video, An Ard Ri.
A very poignant occasion.
I see the Mass was attended by the Duke and Duchess of Anjou.
 
Cory said:
Masses for Louis XVI this January:

https://www.messes-louisxvi.com/
Click to expand...

It is easy to blame Louis XVI or his wife for the revolution, but people forget that Louis XVI's brothers were restored to the throne after the fall of Napoleon and, later, their distant Orléans cousins even made a feeble attempt at some sort of constitutional monarchy. In all those aforementioned cases though, they were toppled by a revolution.

I would say the French monarchy was doomed no matter who, which is a pity really as it was one of Europe's greatest monarchies.
 
Last edited:
The seeds of a cataclysmic revolution were sown FAR earlier than under the reign of the hapless 'Louis le Bon' and his unfortunate wife.

The refusal of his Grandfather Louis xv to address the inequalties of Taxation, opportunity and representation throughout the system, 'Apres-moi le deluge', being [essentially] his attitude, made it inevitable. Time and time again he put off opportunities for meaningful change.
Louis xvi had relatively little time to make any change [15 years], and did so ONLY when the state had been brought to Bankruptcy by the STUPID attempt to wreak revenge on the English [the hereditary enemy] by financing [at VAST, unaffordable cost] the rebellion in America.
This 'pay back' for the French defeat in the 'Seven years War' cost France VERY dear indeed.
 
wyevale said:
The seeds of a cataclysmic revolution were sown FAR earlier than under the reign of the hapless 'Louis le Bon' and his unfortunate wife.

The refusal of his Grandfather Louis xv to address the inequalties of Taxation, opportunity and representation throughout the system, 'Apres-moi le deluge', being [essentially] his attitude, made it inevitable. Time and time again he put off opportunities for meaningful change.
Louis xvi had relatively little time to make any change [15 years], and did so ONLY when the state had been brought to Bankruptcy by the STUPID attempt to wreak revenge on the English [the hereditary enemy] by financing [at VAST, unaffordable cost] the rebellion in America.
This 'pay back' for the French defeat in the 'Seven years War' cost France VERY dear indeed.
Click to expand...

From the point of view of the Americans though, without the French intervention, independence from Great Britain would not have been achieved probably. Too bad they don't teach that properly in American schools !

Of course the Brits also mishandled the American situation badly. If they had offered the Americans a constitutional settlement similar to what Canada got in the mid-19th century (I mean, even before the Canadian confederation),I suppose the Americans would have taken it over independence, but tensions with Great Britain would probably have surfaced again later over slavery, immigration and territorial expansion to the West.
 
Last edited:
The story behind Louisville's regal statue that arrived in Louisville in 1966 of King Louis XVI of France and Navarre.

 
Mbruno said:
Of course the Brits also mishandled the American situation badly. If they had offered the Americans a constitutional settlement similar to what Canada got in the mid-19th century (I mean, even before the Canadian confederation),I suppose the Americans would have taken it over independence, but tensions with Great Britain would probably have surfaced again later over slavery, immigration and territorial expansion to the West.
Click to expand...

I confess I am not up on what the constitutional settlement was with Canada :ermm: (should probably look that up), but the grievances with Britain from the colonies' side was pretty basic: the monopoly of the East India Company, and the protectionist laws Britain had in place to the severe disadvantage of the colonies.

The American colonies were extractive colonies for the British (cotton and tobacco). It is unlikely that they would have given them up without a fight.

Also, the protectionist laws made business very lucrative for the British (colonists were forbidden from selling certain commodities, like tea, except via the East India Company, and hence at greatly inflated prices, especially with import tariffs added on).

The colonists were also forbidden to make clothing: Washington wanted to buy an American-made suit for his first inaugural, and had to buy one from a man in Delaware who was the only man in the colonies who was engaged in that illegal activity. And so it went: pushback at corporatism was at the core of the American 'rebellion'. Unlikely that the British government (includes King who was a corporate owner) would have willingly given up those lucrative policies.
 
Ironically 225 years since the Comte's ancestor Philippe l'Égalité voted for the death of the Sovereign being commemorated...
 
Requiasat in pace, Louis 'le bon'..
 
IF the provenance is 'kosher', I'd expect the Louvre to be bidding, so the Pearls can join the other historic French Royal and Imperial Jewels displayed in the Galerie d'Apollon
 
It would be wonderful if the Louvre acquired them to add to the Royal and Imperial jewel collection.
 
The provenance from Marie-Antoinette has always been very tricky for various jewels in the past, as it was the norm in the XIXth century , in some royal houses in particular, to link some pieces to the late Queen, real or not.
As far i see (i have the press release under the eyes) , the pearls are said to be from Marie-Antoinette "by family tradition" and the diamond necklace, made in the XIXth century, made from isolated stones , "probably" some from the late Queen.
I know for a fact that the Louvre is only interested by jewels in their original settings and with undisputable provenance, so i doubt the museum would be interested in those pieces.
 
Last edited:
The Bourbon-Parma jewels that are said to come from the estate of Marie-Thérèse de France are probably legitimate.
 
"are said" and "probably"
Enough said ....
If there's no inventory entry, no original bill ... the Louvre usualy doesn't place a bid for such, pricey, jewels.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
If only Andrew and Tim would come together for one last bash...
a musical about the French Revolution could become a smash hit with Marie and King Louis in the starring roles..... lets do it !
 
 
Blog Real said:
The Execution of Marie Antoinette.
Click to expand...

Even though Louis XVI was comforted by the sacraments before his execution, the revolutionaries cruelly denied them to his widow Marie Antoinette.

Poor woman.
 
Moonmaiden23 said:
Even though Louis XVI was comforted by the sacraments before his execution, the revolutionaries cruelly denied them to his widow Marie Antoinette.



Poor woman.
Click to expand...
A priest was offered to the Queen to hear her last confession and rode in the cart with her all the way between la Conciergerie and Place de la Révolution, but she refused him because he'd sworn allegiance to the republican constitution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Blog Real
King Louis XVIII of France and Marie Joséphine of Savoy
Replies
2
Views
608
An Ard Ri
An Ard Ri
Marengo
Scoop (2024) Netflix Film about the Newsnight Interview of the Duke of York
Replies
9
Views
1K
victor1319
V
Blog Real
King Lodovico I, King Lodovico II and Kingdom of Etruria
Replies
3
Views
681
Blog Real
Blog Real
Blog Real
King Vittorio Emanuele I (1759-1824) and Queen Maria Teresa of Austria-Este
Replies
2
Views
526
Blog Real
Blog Real
Blog Real
King Carlo Emanuele IV (1751-1819) and Queen Marie Clotilde of France
Replies
1
Views
357
CyrilVladisla
CyrilVladisla

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom