Tea at Trianon: The Lost King of France

John Wilson Croker on Marie-Antoinette

"We have followed the history of Marie Antoinette with the greatest diligence and scrupulosity. We have lived in those times. We have talked with some of her friends and some of her enemies; we have read, certainly not all, but hundreds of the libels written against her; and we have, in short, examined her life with– if we may be allowed to say so of ourselves– something of the accuracy of contemporaries, the diligence of inquirers, and the impartiality of historians, all combined; and we feel it our duty to declare, in as a solemn a manner as literature admits of, our well-matured opinion that every reproach against the morals of the queen was a gross calumny– that she was, as we have said, one of the purest of human beings."

~from History of the Guillotine by John Wilson Croker, 1844

Edmund Burke on Marie-Antoinette

"It is now sixteen or seventeen years since I saw the queen of France, then dauphiness, at Versailles; and surely there never lighted on this orb, which she hardly seemed to touch, a more delightful vision. I saw her just above the horizon, decorating and cheering the elevated sphere she had just begun to move in, glittering like a morning star full of life and splendor and joy. Oh, what a revolution....Little did I dream that I should have lived to see such disasters fall upon her, in a nation of gallant men, in a nation of men of honor and of cavaliers! I thought ten thousand swords must have leaped from their scabbards, to avenge even a look which threatened her with insult. But the age of chivalry is gone; that of sophisters, economists, and calculators has succeeded...."

~Edmund Burke, October 1790

Saturday, May 19, 2007

The Lost King of France

I enjoyed Cadbury's book The Lost King of France, although I would never recommend reading it at night, unless stories of small children being brutalized help one to sleep. Cadbury has a dry, logical style which makes her descriptions of the royal family's descent into hell all the more horrifying, like a police report of a child abduction. I was perturbed when she stated that Fersen and Marie-Antoinette were probably lovers, without giving any evidence, especially when she was careful to give evidence for everything else. Also, on the cover of the book is most likely a picture of Louis-Joseph, not Louis-Charles (Louis XVII). Everyone says that the book proves the death of Louis XVII on June 8, 1795, but it does not. The DNA merely concluded that the desiccated heart which was allegedly removed from the little victim who died in the Temple was the child of a Habsburg princess. As anyone familiar with European history knows, Habsburg princesses were legion; many not having the last name of Habsburg, but certainly having Habsburg genes. So it is not quite as simple as the book or the review make it out to be. Not that I am a Naundorfist, but I try to recall that Madame Royale herself had doubts, since she had not been allowed to identify the body. Share

2 comments:

Michelle Therese said...: I just read that book and I was tortured by it. I had nightmares for days! You mentioned the "lover" thing that bothered me as well. Also, it bugged me that the authoress kept insisting that Madam Royal learned her faith from her Aunt while they were in captivity - rather then her mother the Queen throughout her childhood. She acted as if Marie Antoinette was not a practicing Catholic. That got under my skin!!; May 21, 2007 at 6:00:00 AM EDT
elena maria vidal said...: I agree, those things irked me as well. Especially when Marie-Antoinette was the one who took her children to daily Mass and taught them their prayers.; May 21, 2007 at 8:21:00 AM EDT