Marie-Antoinette, Daughter of the Caesars

by Elena Maria Vidal

  Everyone agrees in calling him weak, but who has tried to put himself in his place and consider the problems that confronted him? To settle the grievances of each class, without irritating the other classes, to relieve the sufferings of the peasants, without antagonizing the nobles, to give greater liberty to the Protestants, without alienating the Church, to reform government, without shaking the foundations of the State, to revive the spirit of the army, without plunging the country into war, to reduce taxation, and at the same time restore the ruined finances. to regenerate morals, to purify the court, and last but not least reconcile the factions within the royal family itself….These were the problems the boy of nineteen was called upon to face, and that he has been described as weak and imbecile for failing to solve.4

  As previously discussed, Louis may have had Asperger’s Syndrome, which of course, no one understood at the time. In spite of his awkward social skills, he had a wide array of interests of both the indoor and outdoor variety. He was fascinated with scientific inventions, which he encouraged, and with geography, outfitting a sea voyage of discovery in the Pacific Ocean. He would read his mail as his ministers delivered their reports, without missing a word of what his ministers said. He subscribed to several international newspapers, as a means of keeping informed of events and of the opinions of others. Louis XVI is always portrayed as politically inept and indifferent, and yet he built up the French navy and army so that Great Britain was defeated in the war for American independence. The ships and soldiers outfitted by King Louis were later used by Napoleon Bonaparte to conquer Europe. During the Revolution, he tried to avoid bloodshed at all costs and would not leave the country because he did not want to abandon his people to the fanatical minority which had seized power. His calm in the face of the calamities is usually interpreted as phlegmatic indifference, but by remaining composed, he was often able to regain control of violent situations. Louis XVI was more and more conflicted between his duties as father of his people and father of his family. He tried early in the Revolution to try to persuade the Queen to escape with their children, but she refused to leave his side.

  Louis was sincerely devout, following the Ten Commandments and precepts of the Church to the best of his ability. According to Madame Campan:

  ...Austere and rigid with regard to himself alone, the King observed the laws of the Church with scrupulous exactness. He fasted and abstained throughout the whole of Lent. He thought it right that the queen should not observe these customs with the same strictness. Though sincerely pious, the spirit of the age had disposed his mind to toleration. Turgot, Malesherbes, and Necker judged that this Prince, modest and simple in his habits, would willingly sacrifice the royal prerogative to the solid greatness of his people.5

  One of the problems Louis had to deal with in his reign was Gallicanism. Gallicanism is defined as:

  …A restraint of the pope’s authority in the Church in favour of that of the bishops and the temporal ruler. It is important, however, to remark at the outset that the warmest and most accredited partisans of Gallican ideas by no means contested the pope's primacy in the Church, and never claimed for their ideas the force of articles of faith.6

  Gallicanism stood against Ultramontanism, which emphasizes the prerogatives and powers of the Pope, in temporal as well as spiritual matters. In the kingdom of France, Gallicanism meant that the king would appoint bishops and send their names to the pope to be ratified. The negative side of Gallicanism meant that, because the Church in France had a great deal of wealth and political power, the persons recommended to the king for bishoprics were usually wordly men, sons of great families, who used the Church to further family or personal ambitions. This led to a decline of religious faith in France, and the growth of cynicism and atheism which the philosophes promoted. Among other ecclesiastical powers held by the king of France, but never recognized by the Vatican, included the right of kings of France to assemble church councils in their dominions; to make laws and regulations touching ecclesiastical matters. The king’s permission was needed for papal legates to enter France and exercise their authority there. The bishops could not obey a papal summons without the king’s permission. Royal officers could not be excommunicated for any deed committed in the exercise of their royal duties. Papal bulls could only be approved by the king before they took effect in France.7 The interference of French royal authority in church matters can in no way be compared to the Henrician schism in England. However, it paved the way for the Revolutionary government to seize complete control of the Church and all ecclesiastical property. After the French revolutionary government seized control of the Church, Louis XVI, after receiving guidance from the Pope, refused to receive Communion from a priest not in union with Rome. He also vetoed the law forcing priests to be deported for not denying the papal supremacy, even though it brought the angry populace upon the palace in June 1792. 8

  Accompanying Gallicanism was the neo-Gallican rite. In the early centuries of Christianity in France the rite common in those territories directly ruled by the King was called the “Gallican” rite, which resembled in many ways the Byzantine rites of Eastern Christianity.9 While the old Gallican rite was replaced by the Latin rite in the Middle Ages, there lingered a neo-Gallican rite in which some prayers and ceremonies differed slightly from the Roman missal, with lots of accomodations for the various dioceses. In Paris before the Revolution there was a unique missal and breviary for the Archdiocese of Paris which emphasized local saints and saints admired by the French, including persons not regarded as particularly saintly today, such as Charlemagne. When Louis and Antoinette lived at Versailles, they observed the “rite of Versailles” which included special prayers for everyone in the royal family, and prayers for every undertaking of the king. In fact, prayers for the king replaced prayers for the Pope.10 Those rites, which are occasionally revived by traditionalist groups, disappeared from regular usage during the Revolution.

  People who came to Versailles to see the King and Queen were usually able to do so at the daily procession to noon Mass in the Royal Chapel. Drums announced his coming as he entered the chapel, usually with the Queen at his side, except when she was staying at Trianon, where she had her own chapel. One observation that many travelers to Versailles had, particularly British visitors, was the fact that the Mass was exceedingly short, even on Sundays, and that courtiers talked throughout the service. No one seemed to be paying attention to the priest on the altar. The choir was more a focus of the congregation than the sacred mysteries; they focused on the King most of all. It seems the royal behavior left much to be desired. One Richard Garmston was shocked to see the King and his brothers talking during Mass, while Sir Simon Romilly claimed to see Louis XVI laughing while smiling at the heavily rouged court ladies in the galleries.11 Whether such stories are true in every detail is questionable; however, it can be safely deduced that religious practice in France had genuinely fallen into decline on every level of society. It would take the blood of the martyrs of the Revolution to restore the Catholic Church in France.

  On a personal level, Louis XVI struggled with “melancholy” at various times throughout his life, perhaps due to the childhood infection with tuberculosis. His doctors recommended outdoor exertion for his health, which of course, included hunting. With a regimen of exercise as part of his strict routine he was able to keep the depression at bay. He was also encouraged to hunt by his confessor, Abbé Soldini, who also saw it as a way the teenaged Louis could build a relationship with his grandfather Louis XV. He regularly ate at the hunt suppers with his grandfather at the invitation of Madame du Barry. In practically every book, article or blog post about Louis XVI, it is usually pointed out that hunting was his passion. However, a love of the chase was not something unique to Louis. Hunting is what the nobility did, all nobles, unless some kind of physical handicap prevented them.12 It had, of course, originated as a way of procuring food to feed large households and families. Even in the most decadent of times before the Revoluti
on of 1789, the game was killed not for mere sport, but to be eaten. That the Bourbon kings of France would devote themselves to such sport should not come as a great surprise, since Versailles was originally built to be a hunting lodge. From the days of Louis XIII hunting was almost a daily activity. The post of Grand Huntsman was among the highest in the realm. Some of the other royal residences, Rambouillet, Compiègne, Fontainebleau, and La Muette were hunting lodges as well. According to David Grubin:

  All of Versailles was initially an immense hunting area, with the original château grounds being ten times larger than they are today. In the area now called the Grand Park, the royal family and the court continued this hunting tradition, both on horseback and on foot....Hunting on horseback was an activity reserved to the nobility in prerevolutionary France, truly the sport of kings. Gifts of fresh game were one way in which nobles showed their generosity to those who did not share their privileges. Such gifts reminded the recipient of his lower place in the social order while demonstrating the nobility of the giver. For the king and his retinue, the Royal Hunt was a noble pursuit. Invitations to the Royal Hunt were greatly coveted, and the king used these invitations to show favor and gain support. Hunts were generally followed by elaborate dinners, sometimes with guest lists in the hundreds....13

  It was at a hunt that an English lady named Mrs. Thrale observed the young Antoinette on horseback, saying:

  20 Octr 1775 begins. This Morning we drove into the Forest as they call it to see the Queen ride on Horseback. We were early enough to see her mount, which was not done as in England by a Man’s hand, but the right foot is fixed in the Stirrup first & then drawn out again when the Lady is on her Saddle. The Horse on which the Queen rode was neither handsome nor gentle, he was however confined with Martingales &c. & richly caparison’d with blue Velvet & Silver Embroidery: the Saddle was ill contrived—sloping off behind—& a Pommel so awkward that no Joyner could have executed it worse,—there was a Handle by the Side I saw. While we were examining the Furniture and Formation of the Horse, the Queen came to ride him, attended by the Duchess de Luignes, who wore Boots & Breeches like a Man with a single Petticoat over them, her Hair tyed & her Hat cocked exactly like those of a Man, Her Majesty's Habit was Puce Colour as they call it her Hat filled with Feathers and her Figure perfectly pleasing. She offered her Arm to the King's Aunts who followed her to the Rendezvous in a Coach, as they were getting out, but they respectfully refus'd her Assistance.14

  Antoinette was said to be a fine and fearless rider, often donning male apparel.15 She won much public acclaim for taking care not to destroy the gardens and crops of the peasants when hunting, forbidding her attendants to do the same even if it meant losing track of the hunt. Such common courtesy was rare. Madame Campan records another incident of Antoinette's compassion for the poor, as follows:

  A circumstance which happened in hunting, near the village of Achères, in the forest of Fontainebleau, afforded the young Princess an opportunity of displaying her respect for old age, and her compassion for misfortune. An aged peasant was wounded by the stag; the Dauphiness jumped out of her calash, placed the peasant, with his wife and children, in it, had the family taken back to their cottage, and bestowed upon them every attention and every necessary assistance. Her heart was always open to the feelings of compassion, and the recollection of her rank never restrained her sensibility. Several persons in her service entered her room one evening, expecting to find nobody there but the officer in waiting; they perceived the young Princess seated by the side of this man, who was advanced in years; she had placed near him a bowl full of water, was stanching the blood which issued from a wound he had received in his hand with her handkerchief, which she had torn up to bind it, and was fulfilling towards him all the duties of a pious sister of charity.16

  Antoinette’s courtesy extended to those of her household. Antoinette once stopped hunting for two weeks because the wife of her head groom was expecting a child at any moment and she did not wish to part the husband from the wife at such a moment. On another occasion, an attendant’s horse kicked her, bruising her foot, but Antoinette made no mention of the injury until the hunt was over so as to not humiliate the culprit. As a young princess, Antoinette had been banned by her mother from joining the hunt on horseback. The Empress feared that she would have a miscarriage, or at least ruin her complexion. The Dauphine, being married and technically no longer subject to her mother, eventually insisted on riding with her husband, finding it a way to capture his attention. Gaining Louis’ regard was, of course, vital for conceiving a child. According to Yonge:

  The latter part of the year 1771 was marked by no very striking occurrences. Marie Antoinette had carried her point, and had begun to ride on horseback without either her figure or her complexion suffering from the exercise. On the contrary, she was admitted to have improved in beauty. She sent her measure to Vienna, to show Maria Teresa how much she had grown, adding that her husband had grown as much, and had become stronger and more healthy-looking, and that she had made use of her saddle-horses to accompany him in his hunting and shooting excursions. Like a true wife, she boasted to her mother of his skill as a shot: the very day that she wrote he had killed forty head of game. (She did not mention that a French sportsman's bag was not confined to the larger game, but that thrushes, blackbirds, and even, red-breasts, were admitted to swell the list.) And the increased facilities for companionship with him that her riding afforded increased his tenderness for her, so that she was happier than ever. Except that as yet she saw no prospect of presenting the empress with a grandchild, she had hardly a wish ungratified.17

  It was at the hunting lodge of La Muette that in 1774 the young Louis XVI and Antoinette broke with protocol by strolling arm in arm, like “man and wife,” before crowds of people who cheered them deliriously. It was considered contrary to etiquette for royal spouses to display affection in public. The new King and Queen wanted to break with such stiff and antiquated customs. By the way, when Louis XVI recorded “nothing” in his journal on July 14, 1789 when the Bastille was stormd by the mob, it meant that he had caught nothing while hunting. It did not mean that he was indifferent or oblivious to the violence in Paris, since it is obvious from his actions that he was quite concerned. It is just one more ridiculous canard which even educated people continually spout about Louis XVI.18 Sadly, when the various hunting laws protecting the game were overturned by the Revolution, there were orgies of peasants killing animals in various parts of France, both large and small game, not to eat but out of rage, leaving the woods and fields full of corpses.

  The following is a portrait in words of Antoinette by Sainte-Beuve based upon the account of the Comte de La Marck:

  The queen’s beauty in her youth has been enthusiastically praised. She was not a beauty, if we take her features in detail: the eyes, although expressive, were not very fine, her aquiline nose seemed too pronounced. ‘I am not quite sure that her nose belonged to her face,’ said a clever observer. Her lower lip was more prominent and thick than one expects in a pretty woman; her figure also was a little full; but the general effect was of a noble manner and sovereign dignity. Even in negligé hers was the beauty of a queen, rather than of a woman of fashion.

  ‘No woman,’ said M. de Meilhan, ‘ever carried her head better, and it was so set upon her shoulders that every movement she made was instinct with grace and nobility. Her gait was stately, yet light, and recalled Virgil's phrase, incessu patuit dea [“she was in truth a goddess”]. And there was in her person a still rarer quality,—the union of grace and of the most imposing dignity.’

  Add a dazzlingly fresh complexion, beautiful arms and hands, a charming smile, and tactful speech which found its inspiration less in the mind than in the heart, in the desire to be kind and to please. 19

  It is sometimes said of Antoinette that she hated France and the French, and most of all hated being the Queen. None of this is true. Antoinette saw being Queen of France, in spite of the many inconve
niences and burdens attached to the role, as being the apex of earthly existence. She preferred for her daughter Madame Royale to remain in France as a princess of France, married to a French-born prince, rather than arrange a marriage for her with a king of another country. Also, Antoinette did not want to be separated from her daughter as she herself had been divided from her family at such a tender age. Madame Campan attests to these facts in her memoirs, while relating some events that occurred in 1787. To quote:

  I had an opportunity on this occasion, as indeed on many others, of judging to what extent the Queen valued and loved France and the dignity of our Court. She then told me that Madame, in marrying her cousin, the Duc d’Angoulême, would not lose her rank as daughter of the Queen; and that her situation would be far preferable to that of queen of any other country; and that there was nothing in Europe to be compared to the Court of France; and that it would be necessary, in order to avoid exposing a French Princess to feelings of deep regret, in case she should be married to a foreign prince, to take her from the palace of Versailles at seven years of age, and send her immediately to the Court in which she was to dwell; and that at twelve would be too late; for recollections and comparisons would ruin the happiness of all the rest of her life. The Queen looked upon the destiny of her sisters as far beneath her own....20