Talk:Marie Antoinette/Archive 2

Chou
I'm writing a book based on fact about marie.It's long been a misconception that chou means cabbage in "mon petit chou" and other like sayings. However, chou is also a kind of cake often seen at weddings, and when the French use chou as a term of endearment, it's a reference to the cake chou à la crème, not cabbage. This is in regards to my change of the following in the Motherhood section, replacing cabbage with cake: "Speaking of her youngest son, Louis-Charles, she said, "Mon chou d'amour ("My cabbage of love," "cabbage" being a popular term of endearment even into modern times in France), is charming, and I love him madly. He loves me very much too, in his own way, without embarrassment."" RemiCogan 20:36, 17 August 2007 (UTC) hi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maya 584 (talk • contribs) 05:44, 18 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Antonia Fraser as well as many other historians and French people I know say that Chou means cabbage. But the main point is that it is a term of endearment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.9.203.126 (talk) 18:02, 10 October 2008 (UTC)


 * In France, new-born babies are not brought by storks but come out of a cabbage (= chou). So, naturally, each new-born child is a petit chou;  hence Marie Antoinette calling her baby her chou d'amour.  All French children at one time or other are affectionately addressed to as mon petit chou, mon gros chou, ma chouchoute, bout de chou, petit bout de chou... and I can assure you that it does not mean the pastry chou à la crème but the nice round cabbage head.
 * Frania W. (talk) 21:01, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Analysis of The Cake Quote?
One thing lacking, in this article, is an actual examination of why the dubiously attributed "let them eat cake" was allegedly so inflammatory in the first place. Especially since cake was so common in France. I'm guessing that it was simply that this would have made her seem so clueless about the masses that she didn't realize that not having bread would be any real hardship, but even if that is the reason the quote was offensive, it should be spelled out in the article. If there was any more elaborate reason, it definitely needs to be noted. Kaz 18:24, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I would like to make it quite clear=Marie Antoinette never did say "let them eat cake" (referring, of course, to the starving peasants..) Also, this article astounded me, because its' writers kept defending Marie Antoinette, saying she was simply an innocent woman who kept being wrongly accused. What if the French had an awfully GOOD reason to hate her? She obviously was not a great ruler-the country ended up in demise under the rule of her and her husband. The author shouldn't take sides and should simply tell us the clear facts instead of defending a queen's supposed 'innocence'! Seleneface (talk) 04:10, 7 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Might I add:
 * Jean-Jacques Rousseau, in his 1783 autobiography Confessions, relates that "a great princess" is said to have advised, with regard to starving peasants, "S’ils n’ont plus de pain, qu’ils mangent de la brioche", commonly translated as "If they have no bread, let them eat cake". This saying is commonly mis-attributed to the ill-fated Queen Marie-Antoinette, wife of Louis XVI; it has been speculated that he was actually referring to Maria Theresa of Spain, the wife of Louis XIV, or various other aristocrats. However, this should not be taken as a slight against the working poor, as was probably misunderstood by Rousseau. The "great princess," who ever she was, was probably referring to the urban poor rather than peasants, since it was in cities that the price of bread was strictly regulated. If the poor had no bread available, than the law that maintained that fancy breads had to be sold at the regulated price, and not the luxury price, should have been enforced. Such laws prevented supplies of food from being diverted from serving the commonweal to the luxury trades. Bakers had to think about how much expensive butter, eggs, and sugar to invest in their production. If they ran short of plain bread (or so the theory went) they would be forced to sell their rich pastries at a loss. It is ironic that the "great princess'" defense of the poor should be twisted to survive as an idiotic, and baffling comment. What is clear is that Marie-Antoinette could not have said "let them eat cake." She was still living in Austria in 1766 when it was first printed, and she was but ten years old.-- Benfidar 19:29, 1 May 2008 (CST) (Early Modern European professor.)

Regardless of the validity of the quote or not, it is often attributed to her. At present, visitors can't find any mention of the quote on Marie's article, should they come here for an explaination, thus it looks like an oversight. I've added a link to the controversy article (Let them eat cake) and a brief explaination. Aabh (talk) 03:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Let Them Eat Cake (TV Show)
British comedy duo French & Saunders did a television miniseries called "Let Them Eat Cake" about a fictional Baroness living in Versailles. The characterization of Marie Antoinette in this show was of a daft, dippy Austrian puritan who bumbled through her own reign. Something might be said in the "Television" section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.20.173.96 (talk) 03:57, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Transfer of page.
I vote to transfer the Papirini page over here, or have her rewrite in the recentchanges since she made it. And let them Eat Cake is a *MISQUOTE*. Yes, a *huge* misquote. She didn't actually say it, it was another figure. And I do think Pairini's version of the page is still higher quality than the current page cause it has sources. That's far more than this page has. She also fixed some of the complaints that are addressed after she posted the request. Please post for an against. If no comments are made at the end of next Sunday, I'll request she moves it or I'll move it myself.--Hitsuji Kinno 20:05, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Coppola movie material
A substantial portion of the article appears to be based entirely on the Sofia Coppola movie; I have removed the most egregious portions, but have kept a bit in case someone can come up with sources for that. The rest was simply horribly blatant, and since nobody has managed to source it in over eight months, it's better to keep it out of the article for now. Johnleemk | Talk 22:47, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Recent major rewrite
The whole article has recently been completely rewritten by Hitsuji Kinno. A job well done on getting rid of the movie material, and providing citations for the article.

However, I have a number of concerns; first off, a minor issue: was getting rid of the succession boxes really necessary? I have heard many good arguments for reducing this template overload in the past, but surely this is going overboard? Also, we need to do some work on formatting the lists at the end; the see also section currently leads to red links (maybe someone is planning to create them?).

More pertinently, I am concerned that we are blatantly overrelying on Fraser's biography, which as outstanding as it is, is still only one source; we should be drawing on a variety of sources. I note with concern that some sources in the previous revision (a couple of which were added by me) have been excised.

As with all major rewrites, we must try to draw on the best of both revisions to make a better article. The present article is a fine piece of work, but it is, in my view, lacking in some aspects that the old article was not. Thoughts? Johnleemk | Talk 04:50, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Edit needed
Hi everyone. I just added my first page. It is "La Carmagnole" which is a song made popular during the Revolution that is particularly insulting to Marie Antoinette. I would like to add a link to this page, but would need someone else's help since this page is semi-protected. I was looking in the French Revolution section, around the phrase "The result was a decline in popularity for both the king and queen," and then maybe including "exemplified by a popular song of the time "La Carmagnole," or something to that effect. I'm not too particular about how it has to be done, but I think it would add some useful information to be linked to the La Carmagnole site.  Please let me know what you think, and thanks for the help. 592KatieM 21:13, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

neutrality of article
I knew nothing of Marie Antoinette, so decided to come to wiki to read up on her and speaking from an unbiased point of view, after reading the article I must say that the article seems to be unfavourably in favour of her, much of the reading made me feel as if it was trying to defend her at every point. To bring this article up to wikipedia's standards of neutrality it needs to be cleaned up. (Wiki332 13:15, 23 October 2007 (UTC))


 * I agree with the above post. The only knowledge of Marie Antoinette that I had was from the 2006 Marie Antoinette movie.  It is obvious that movies exaggerate as well as leave out important details which prompted me to investigate further on WIKI.  After reading I do have a better understanding of this figure and her importance, however I also noticed the article seemed to make her into something of an innocent woman who was always wrongly accused.  If this is not the case (which I assume it is not)  It needs to be made more clear why the French disliked her so, and also needs more elaboration on why "Let them eat cake" was such a volitile statement to the French citizens.  74.93.57.169 19:13, 30 October 2007 (UTC) Sarawikikiwi


 * Well, surprisingly a lot of biographies sympathise (IMO to an unnecessary extent) with Marie Antoinette - the sympathetic view is often dominant. As I said above, I think a huge part of the problem is our reliance on Antonia Fraser's biography, though most other biographies frequently adopt sympathetic positions as well. We shouldn't be making value judgments about Marie Antoinette (as per the neutrality policy), but the fact is that a lot of allegations made against her were false, which is (again IMO) primarily why so many biographers have been keen to exonerate her. Johnleemk | Talk 11:53, 30 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I just read the Antonia Fraser book and found it far better than I expected. I thought it was going to be an attempt to paint her as a misunderstood figure and a feminist hero, but it is more balanced than it is given credit for.  That said, one of the major points of Marie Antoinette historiography is that she has remained a controversial figure since the 18th century--and the fact that we are still arguing about her says something about why she is important and issues of wealth and class in the US and Europe.  By and large, I tend to see her as a figure antagonistic to the rights of common people--but the fact that she continually is part of our contemporary cultural dicussion makes here a very interesting figure.


 * Also, the Legion of Honor in San Francisco has just organized a show about MA--and the book is worth looking at--for anyone who is working on this entry. [Architecture professor]  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Architectureprofessor (talk • contribs) 21:43, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Can you give examples of the articles bias (Anonymous) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.23.13.159 (talk) 23:11, 4 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I am willing to do some clean-up, making notes out of some 6 different GOOD biographies of the Queen this (not just those made to read like novel - in fact I have but one written in that manner and that IS the Fraser biopic,) as I also feel such a strong dependance on Fraser gives the feel of too biased an article. Sadly, much of the information is very biased when it comes to this figure, but this is not surprising given the life and death of the Queen, and the rewriting of history during the French Revolution. Am putting some notes down and getting the edits ready as we speak. Its going to take me to the end of July, but hopefully this may quit the neutrality dispute. Probably not. Originalninjacat (talk) 14:48, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

The article is not bias but there was so much smut and pamphlets released by revolutionaries, people who wanted power, or people who didn't like her that history has to basically be rewritten so everything we have learnt about her e.g. "let them eat cake" has to be taken back. Marie Antoinette's history was written by those pamphlets almost as if a gossip columnist had written history of today. History is suppose to be facts and I know I learnt more facts about Egyptians than I did about her in school. It is important that historians get it right and since for so long she was misrepresented now a lot of historians who seem to be defending her are just telling facts. She was disliked for being Austrian and she was a scapegoat. I think it is ignorant for people to say well it must be true because they didn't like her. Is it true that Jewish people are bad because they were slaughtered in huge numbers? O yea the Nazis must of had a good reason, right? What a ridiculous statement. They were, like her, used as scapegoats and hungry poor desperate people are easily manipulated. A Lot of the French did like her until all the smut; which, she mostly refused to acknowledge and ignored instead of defending herself not believing it deserved a mention. Everyone sounds like they want history that is not based on facts because it sounds better or seems better. Using her letters, people who knew her, dates and other form of facts historians have developed a truer version of the Queen. If you knew anything about the French monarch at the time then you would know the Queens had no official power and a mistress of the king would have more say than the Queen. How then can she be blamed for an already poor and falling apart society unless it just sounds better that way? Do some research before accusing of bias. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.109.252.117 (talk) 08:29, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I must agree with the above comment by User 122.109.252.117. So much smut came out during her life time that - unless one is able & willing to sort out what's left of all that period's documents - it is difficult not to be biased one way or the other.  At the time of the Revolution & after, letters that could have helped in our judgment were destroyed and much of what has been left for the common people is the smut carried down from one generation to the next.  Marie-Antoinette & Louis XVI were the victims, not of their shortcomings, but happened to be the ones right there when France was getting ready for a big change, and they could not withstand the tsunami the French Revolution of 1789 turned out to be.  Everything Marie-Antoinette was doing, as well as what she was not, was used against her.  Treatment of her & her family after their imprisonment in the Temple tower was horrible, as were the last months of her life, without speaking of the suffering imposed on her son.  Nice bits of torture were served to her: the head of the princesse de Lamballe on a pike, the execution of her husband, the separation from her son, her stay at the Conciergerie, her trial, her last hours up to her execution.  So, when one weighs her so-called wrongdoings against her post-Versailles era suffering, it is easy to understand how difficult it may be for some not to have a biased opinion, and when someone brings out the smut, there is & always will be another to bring out a contrary argument.  In the case of Marie-Antoinette, what she was made to endure after the imprisonment of the royal family at the Temple was a rather high price to pay for her real or invented mistakes.  She may have acted like a silly twenty-year old when she was twenty years old (please compare with our modern princesses or daughters of some heads of states), but her courageous attitude when things got really rough is probably the reason of the *positive bias* of some.  Remember that even the tricoteuses at her trial were touched by her dignified attitude & these women of the Revolution rose to defend her honour as a mother, meaning that they did not believe the allegations against her.  Napoléon I, one man not known for his tender heart said:  "La mort de la Reine fut un crime pire que le régicide" - "The death of the Queen was a crime worse than the regicide" (meaning the execution of Louis XVI), while the writer Chateaubriand wrote:  "Le premier crime de la Révolution fut la mort du Roi, mais le plus affreux fut la mort de la Reine." - "The first crime of the Revolution was the death of the King, but the most horrible was the death of the Queen."  As the above user puts it,  *Marie Antoinette's history was written by those pamphlets almost as if a gossip columnist had written history of today.*.  As far as I am concerned, pamphlets and other libelles should go directly into the trash can of History.
 * There is a parallel to be made also with the treatment given the imperial family by the anti-tsarists in Russia, the pamphlets against the Tsarina whose young son's life was hanging on the hope he would never suffer a cut, internal or external, their imprisonment & their cold murder. Again, history was rewritten by revolutionaries, or rather by the Soviets, and it took 80 years for the Russian people to be allowed to learn the truth and give a decent burial to their last Tsar and his family.
 * One of my objections to this article is the fact that it is based ONLY on (as good a historian as she may be) Mme Fraser's book, and there is no mention of works by other authors who preceded her, like outstanding French historians who have studied/researched the French Revolution inside & out. This article is good publicity for Antonia Fraser's book, and whoever started it should have called on her to write it. Frania W. (talk) 14:00, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

In regards to 'Let them eat cake'
I have not read this article in its entirety, but I hope it is clear that Marie Antoinette never actually said "Let them eat cake." That is a quote wrongly associated with her, and this should be made clear if it isn't already. 20:38, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Vincent Cronin in his biography "Louis and Antoinette" states that the comment was made by Anne of Austria during the civil wars of the Fronde.jeanne (talk) 14:44, 27 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Might I add:
 * Jean-Jacques Rousseau, in his 1783 autobiography Confessions, relates that "a great princess" is said to have advised, with regard to starving peasants, "S’ils n’ont plus de pain, qu’ils mangent de la brioche", commonly translated as "If they have no bread, let them eat cake". This saying is commonly mis-attributed to the ill-fated Queen Marie-Antoinette, wife of Louis XVI; it has been speculated that he was actually referring to Maria Theresa of Spain, the wife of Louis XIV, or various other aristocrats. However, this should not be taken as a slight against the working poor, as was probably misunderstood by Rousseau. The "great princess," who ever she was, was probably referring to the urban poor rather than peasants, since it was in cities that the price of bread was strictly regulated. If the poor had no bread available, than the law that maintained that fancy breads had to be sold at the regulated price, and not the luxury price, should have been enforced. Such laws prevented supplies of food from being diverted from serving the commonweal to the luxury trades. Bakers had to think about how much expensive butter, eggs, and sugar to invest in their production. If they ran short of plain bread (or so the theory went) they would be forced to sell their rich pastries at a loss. It is ironic that the "great princess'" defense of the poor should be twisted to survive as an idiotic, and baffling comment. What is clear is that Marie-Antoinette could not have said "let them eat cake." She was still living in Austria in 1766 when it was first printed, and she was but ten years old.-- Benfidar 19:29, 1 May 2008 (CST) (Early Modern European professor.)

lesbian
I don't know anything about this nor if this has been discussed before here. But this:
 * It was alleged during her lifetime that she was a lesbian, but there is no proof to these claims whatsoever.

seems out of place in the lead paragraph, a place for the most important facts about the figure. -- Taku 14:26, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


 * she was not a lesbian, that was one of the rumors about her. there were many rumors about her because she was not very well-liked by the people.  along with the lesbian rumors there were also rumors of her having affairs and rumors of incest.


 * 69.203.10.232 (talk) 02:34, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

The title
This title of this article is desperate! "Marie Antoinette" is just too simple for a woman who was Queen of France. Why don't you change it to "Marie Antoinette of Austria"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.250.113.199 (talk) 13:37, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Desperate? In what way? The title is perfect. It is in fact her name. If you look at any other historical figure on Wikipedia, you'll see that their name is what is used for the article's title. The only time other descriptions are used is when the name is ambiguous. If you have any more questions check out Wikipedia's naming conventions. In her case I'm pretty sure there is no ambiguity. Plus the article goes into detail about her noble heritage and her marriage to Louis XVI of France.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sdgjake (talk • contribs) 15:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Entrails?!!
What is this about people "storming the palace" for Marie's entrails?!! Is this vandalism? 65.183.135.166 (talk) 00:39, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


 * No, that's accurate. KingAndrewI (talk) 04:45, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Marie Antoinette Queen of France. Period —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lamballe (talk • contribs) 12:02, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikiproject France Assessment
WikiProject France Assessment

This article was listed on WikiProject France under articles needing assessment. This article has been rated B-class because:
 * It is informative and seems to be fairly well sourced.
 * It has a wide range of useful images.
 * The neutrality of the article is in dispute (or was recently under dispute) as referenced on the discussion page, otherwise I'd be interested to see how it faired in a GA review.

Also, please note that I assessed this article as "top" importance for WikiProject France. Marie Antoinette is a widely known name from France (up there w/ Jean D'Arc) and has a significant cultural role. Therefore, this topic deserves to be top importance. Lazulilasher (talk) 17:37, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Possible Origin of the Cake Quote Legend
At that time, "cakes" made of various grains were a staple food for the peasantry. Grain, because of climate changes, was becoming more and more in short supply, making the "cakes" themselves more difficult/expensive to make and/or buy. The French court had by then discovered that the potato could be grown easily in France and could replace much of the grain as a staple. As a result, realizing the problems coming their way, they attempted to encourage the peasants to eat them, even setting the example themselves. However, the peasantry refused to eat the potato, believing them to be unhealthy and a trick of the ruling class because they grew underground. (Note the opposite - and very successful - reaction of the German peasantry.) Thus, legend has it that, when asked what the peasants should eat and knowing that they would not eat potatoes, she is reputed to have replied, "Let them eat (rye, wheat, etc) cake!" The interpretation being, of course, that she was fed up with peasants who would not take good advice. (The attitude is still much the same, however: a disdain for the common man.)--71.11.230.32 (talk) 01:46, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh! Why not stop putting "let them eat cake" in/out of Marie-Antoinette's mouth? That phrase had (supposedly) been uttered by another queen a good 3/4 of a century before MA was born.  Besides, taken out of its context, the phrase has been interpreted incorrectly.  One should know the various laws that have covered the fabrication of bread in France throughout the centuries, and what was to be done when there was no bread left.  Too long to go into details here.  However, there is a law in France, a remainder of older laws, that when there is none of the cheapest bread left in a shop, the owner of the shop has to sell the next more expensive bread at the price of the less expensive.  Hence - and probably - the origin of the "let them eat cake" phrase.  Frania W. (talk) 22:03, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Might I add:
 * Jean-Jacques Rousseau, in his 1783 autobiography Confessions, relates that "a great princess" is said to have advised, with regard to starving peasants, "S’ils n’ont plus de pain, qu’ils mangent de la brioche", commonly translated as "If they have no bread, let them eat cake". This saying is commonly mis-attributed to the ill-fated Queen Marie-Antoinette, wife of Louis XVI; it has been speculated that he was actually referring to Maria Theresa of Spain, the wife of Louis XIV, or various other aristocrats. However, this should not be taken as a slight against the working poor, as was probably misunderstood by Rousseau. The "great princess," who ever she was, was probably referring to the urban poor rather than peasants, since it was in cities that the price of bread was strictly regulated. If the poor had no bread available, than the law that maintained that fancy breads had to be sold at the regulated price, and not the luxury price, should have been enforced. Such laws prevented supplies of food from being diverted from serving the commonweal to the luxury trades. Bakers had to think about how much expensive butter, eggs, and sugar to invest in their production. If they ran short of plain bread (or so the theory went) they would be forced to sell their rich pastries at a loss. It is ironic that the "great princess'" defense of the poor should be twisted to survive as an idiotic, and baffling comment. What is clear is that Marie-Antoinette could not have said "let them eat cake." She was still living in Austria in 1766 when it was first printed, and she was but ten years old.-- Benfidar 19:29, 1 May 2008 (CST) (Early Modern European professor.)

Writing
I have no idea as to the neutrality of the article but it desperately needs to be rewritten with an eye to correcting grammar and word usage. Risssa (talk) 23:42, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Early Years
This is a terrible analogy: "Though the queen was criticized for her expenditures, in truth, her spending amounted to little in comparison to the debt incurred by France during the Seven Years' War, still unpaid. It would be further exacerbated by Vergennes' prodding Louis XVI to get involved in Great Britain's war with its North American colonies, due to France's traditional hatred of England.[29]" Why is her personal spending being compared to the cost of an entire war? Wars are usually pretty expensive, so that analogy doesn't really tell us anything except to mislead people into thinking that either wars are inexpensive or that if personal expenditures don't amount to costing more than an entire war then the personal expenditures are not excessive. Both those conclusions are utterly ridiculous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.90.123.141 (talk) 17:25, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I quite agree and I have reworded it to remove the direct comparison. The debt may have been a larger issue due to its size but that does not warrant a comparison between the two. EconomicsGuy (talk) 22:31, 13 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Whether or not the amounts were comparable, surely the point is that the extravagances have been considered to be of the same or greater importance than that of the wars France was fighting or funding? MA was blamed for France's debts. If her expenditure was negligible in comparison with military spending (and therefore irrelevant to France's economic problems) it's important to make the point as it exonerates her from a recurrent criticism.--82.15.53.62 (talk) 12:22, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Neutrality
Looking at the list of references for this article, there appears to be only one, Antonia Fraser's biography. My impression of Ms. Fraser's work is that she's hardly unbiased, and once could easily look at this article as a summary of the book. I have a copy of Carrolly Erickson's To The Scaffold, which in the next few weeks I'd like to use as a sort of counter-reference to see what I can see on this subject. I would urge anyone else who has similar works to do a comparison so that we can have a more level ground from which to view this subject. Tomwhite56 (talk) 21:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC)


 * If one checks the wiki French article on Marie-Antoinette, there are twenty (20) works of reference listed, of which only one is Antonia Fraser's book. Par contre, in the Anglo wiki article, there are 112 notes to the text with only three (3) not referring to Mme Fraser's book. Also, the list of books in "Further reading" is mostly "novel-type" - then, of course, to be sure we do not miss the cherry on the cake, there is the unavoidable external link to Sophia Coppola's movie.  (By the way, today is the 215th anniversary of the execution of Louis XVI.) Frania W. (talk) 23:23, 21 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Shows you what I know. I wish I knew French so I could read the French article.  It appears to be completely different from the Anglo article.  I thought, for no good reason, that each article was central and then translated into the languages, which is a pretty infantilely naive viewpoint now that I think about it.  From this perspective it would seem that the Anglo article is even more unreliable that I first thought.  Having gotten myself in this far, I definitely plan to further research this using at least Carolly Erickson's work (I see Ms. Erickson as intelligent, reliable and neutral).  What do you think?Tomwhite56 (talk) 19:10, 22 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Shows you what I do not know: I have not read Carolly Erickson's book, but many others - mostly French & based on historical research, not "novel type".  However, and the warning at top of article: The neutrality of this article is disputed underlines the problem, I do not see how one can stay "neutral" about Marie-Antoinette & I cannot see how an article about her will ever be "neutral".  It has been shown times & times again throughout history manuals & literature.  It is nearly impossible not to have a biaised opinion.  And it is even more difficult to know what the truth is because of inventions, common gossip & the "libelles" written during her life time, topped by the history of France "revised" during & after the Revolution.  Imagine learning about the imperial Romanov family of Russia through books written by the Soviets!  In France, for political reasons, each régime put on its own twist to French History. Marie-Antoinette & Louis XVI were not the cause of the French Revolution.  Philosophical ideas created a political atmosphere that led to it.  The royal couple in France, heir to a system they did not create, and shielded by their environment, did not see the gathering of the storm - or rather, did not understand the shape that revolution was to take.  When they did, it was too late.  Their death at the guillotine - and their courageous stance in the months that led to it - made them as much victims of the Revolution than the many innocent & guilty ones who perished then.


 * When I read a wikipedia article in English, I immediately go to the French version. Some are translated word for word, for instance, the July Monarchy, then somebody adds one thing & another, and within a few weeks or months, there are many differences in the articles. I have been following those on the French Revolution, its participants & survivors.  RE the article on Marie-Antoinette, it is obvious to me that many of the contributors in the English version had no inkling of anything French before Marie-Antoinette became à la mode these past few years.  It will be interesting to see the evolution of such articles throughout the years.  Frania W. (talk) 22:49, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Featured article
Please add  - 89.146.158.20 (talk) 15:28, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Marie Antoinette
Help. I'm an registrated user, but I can't change "Marie" in the article to "Marie Antoinette".

Please help me soon.

--AndreaMimi (talk) 18:14, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Marie Antoinette
She has been used in many media productions, such as the movie of her, and also been mentioned in many songs, like for example, the song Marry Me by Emilie Autumn, a gothic industrial beutiful goddess. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnnyHell666 (talk • contribs) 09:48, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree with your opinion of Emilie Autumn, however it seems most think the song Marry Me is actually about Catherine Howard, the fifth wife of Henry VIII of England. The only part of this song that could relate to Marie Antoinette would be the chorus. Marie Antoinette would come to love Louis after time and she was given away by her mother. Catherine was executed for cheating as well, only in her case she had in fact committed adultery. She was also the most frivolous of his wives. Another little factoid: One of Henry VIII's favorite meals was peacock. The first sentence is mine, the rest came from There is a lot more on it here link title ShaktiValkyrie (talk) 20:21, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

The "cake" question
To straighten this thing out, the infamous quote's original wording is actually: "... qu'ils mangent de la brioche!" Brioche is not some fancy cake, but rather a spruced-up version of (sweet) bread (still popular today). The gist of the story, however, remains the same.

But I do suggest to simply take a look at the entry for "Brioche", where the purported Marie Antoinette quote is also sufficiently discussed.

As for the rather extravagant theory given above, I have absolutely no idea where he/she got that from -

Neustrelitz (talk) 00:29, 7 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I put a comment on the "let them eat cake" issue a bit higher up before having read this later one. So, I am putting it again below.  Whether the word used was "brioche" or "gâteau" is irrelevant, that is not what is being disputed because a good sweet "brioche" is closer to a cake than to bread.  What is wrong is that the quote has been attributed to Marie-Antoinette wrongly.  Here is what I wrote above:


 * Oh! Why not stop putting "let them eat cake" in/out of Marie-Antoinette's mouth? That phrase had (supposedly) been uttered by another queen a good 3/4 of a century before MA was born. Besides, taken out of its context, the phrase has been interpreted incorrectly. One should know the various laws that have covered the fabrication of bread in France throughout the centuries, and what was to be done when there was no bread left. Too long to go into details here. However, there is a law in France, a remainder of older laws, that when there is none of the cheapest bread left in a shop, the owner of the shop has to sell the next more expensive bread at the price of the less expensive. Hence - and probably - the origin of the "let them eat cake" phrase. Frania W. (talk) 22:03, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Frania W. (talk) 22:20, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Might I add:
 * Jean-Jacques Rousseau, in his 1783 autobiography Confessions, relates that "a great princess" is said to have advised, with regard to starving peasants, "S’ils n’ont plus de pain, qu’ils mangent de la brioche", commonly translated as "If they have no bread, let them eat cake". This saying is commonly mis-attributed to the ill-fated Queen Marie-Antoinette, wife of Louis XVI; it has been speculated that he was actually referring to Maria Theresa of Spain, the wife of Louis XIV, or various other aristocrats. However, this should not be taken as a slight against the working poor, as was probably misunderstood by Rousseau. The "great princess," who ever she was, was probably referring to the urban poor rather than peasants, since it was in cities that the price of bread was strictly regulated. If the poor had no bread available, than the law that maintained that fancy breads had to be sold at the regulated price, and not the luxury price, should have been enforced. Such laws prevented supplies of food from being diverted from serving the commonweal to the luxury trades. Bakers had to think about how much expensive butter, eggs, and sugar to invest in their production. If they ran short of plain bread (or so the theory went) they would be forced to sell their rich pastries at a loss. It is ironic that the "great princess'" defense of the poor should be twisted to survive as an idiotic, and baffling comment. What is clear is that Marie-Antoinette could not have said "let them eat cake." She was still living in Austria in 1766 when it was first printed, and she was but ten years old.-- Benfidar 19:29, 1 May 2008 (CST) (Early Modern European professor.)


 * You can, but four times on the same page is, perhaps, a bit much :) Lovingboth (talk) 08:26, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

BAIS?
I would think not. Those of you wishing to know more of the negative aspects of the Queen are out of luck. Marie Antoinette was a scapegoat for the French citizens, a way to blame the ineffective government set in place centuries before her own ascendancy. In reality she held little if any political power hence her position "the Queen Consort" of France. If anyone is to blame it is Louis XIV and his great-grandson Louis XV because both rulers knowledgeably allowed the economy to slip into a recession. Most if not all historians can agree that Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette inherited their problems and by this time it was too late.

Please understand that the Queen had no role in the daily affairs of government, and far from being the frivolous woman of the court she preferred not to live in Versailles, rather she enjoyed the simple pleasures of life and the company of her close friends, THIS was her mistake. France was ever suspicious of the "Austrian woman" and could only imagine what she was doing in the Petite Trianon.

I will not make any excuses for the deficit of France, it was no one's fault but the monarchy and aristocracy, but to blame one woman for the ills or France is illogical. If anyone helped to expand the deficit of the monarchy it was the ineffective ministers of court and the people themselves. First and foremost positions at court granted usually by favor, when Louis inherited the throne he was surrounded by a bunch of dolts more appropriately the kings "favourites". Louis was hardly trained for the position of king, because his father and brother were both in line for the crown before him, and when they died no one had ever even imagined that Louis-Auguste would become the next roi de France, however the king was still the father of all Frenchman and it was much easier for the people of France to blame the ills of society on an Austrian than their own king.

Marie Antoinette was known to spend out of her allotted royal budget; however we must compare her spending habits to those of previous Queen's of France in retrospect Maria Leszczyńska spent more on diamonds in a decade than Marie Antoinette spent on her entire reign of eighteen years. In comparison to most of the noblesse of her time period she was quite radical in her ideals. Appropriate to the age of enlightenment both Louis and Antoinette had a strong sense of the suffering that their people faced. Louis abolished torture and unlike his predecessor Louis XIV when the woman marched on Versailles Louis could have had them all executed for high treason, but that was out of character. Marie Antoinette as the mother of the children of France focused most of her attention to their education. Even from a very early age she made certain to provide her children with a sense of urgency to protect the people before themselves.

Marie Antoinette is a style icon. She was fashionable and loved the exuberant life that the Salons and Parisian parties had to offer, but is that enough to place her at fault? Critics point out that if she was so worried about her people then why not lose the diamonds?

She was the Queen of France the most cultured and learned country in Europe, and her position as queen served as an example of the splendor of France. Her duty was to present France at its best. She was criticized for overindulgence, but then during the Trianon years she lost the corsets and diamonds in favor of light cotton gowns then she was accused of degrading the sanctity of her position. One thing is certain she was destined to die, but what is important is how we remember her. Even if Louis and Antoinette radically altered their behavior France and the modern era were set for a grand upheaval, like her position had dictated she would serve as an example for those who would follow her.

My Opinion

I love her. She was everything that the philosophes and enlightenment thinkers hated and loved about society. Her nature was to please, and she enjoyed the glamour of the age, but at heart Versailles was just too much. If one could recreate her library you would find every influential enlightenment thinker spanning from Voltaire to Rousseau, which she read quite often. Rousseau's work "The Social Contract" opens with the gripping maxim "Man is born free but everywhere he is in chains". Marie Antoinette refused to allow tradition to dictate her life. If anything Marie Antoinette represents the manifestation of the enlightened woman, even the revolutionaries would be hard pressed to find any real evidence supporting their claims of treason against the Queen. Like any prominent figure in the pageant of history she will forever remain susceptible to speculation and criticism, but it is a one sided debate she nor anyone else needs to continue to support her innocence, it is proven by her actions and through the slanders and accusations placed before her she never once lost her composure reflecting not a Queen but the woman that she had become.

DaintyLittleMorsel (talk) 02:32, 20 March 2008 (UTC)DaintyLittleMorsel

Polonaise?
I studied XVIIIth French fashion and I can say that this information is wrong. A robe à la Polonaise didn't have paniers. In fact a Polonaise is: A dress very less wide, with rigid corset but with a gown simpler, short to the ankle, without paniers or other structures, but overtopped by a outergown curled at the rear. This curl is obtained pulling little inner rope, like a theatre-curtain. This is a Robe à la Polonaise:http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/images/h2/h2_1976.146a,b_1970.87.jpg in this paint Marie Antoinette wears a normal dress of court, very wide with panniers like an other (more famous) paint:


 * I agree with the above comment. The two paintings here show Marie-Antoinette wearing a "robe à panier".  Here is another link (French) to a "robe à la polonaise" also called "robe à la reine" : la "reine" (the "queen") being Marie-Antoinette:

http://www.cg14.fr/chateau_benouville/xhtml/mode.asp?numero=47 Frania W. (talk) 23:03, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Summary of Antonia Fraser's book
Too many anecdotes in this (encyclopedic?) article, which is based solely, it seems, on Antonia Fraser's book. Frania W. (talk) 21:14, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree, from looking at the citations it seems like it:s just a retelling of that one book. However is anyone actually going to go and bother to find other sources, re-source parts of the article, re-write parts of the article? Heh, good luck —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.111.192.130 (talk) 03:04, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Marie Antoinette-typo
It should be "hoarding" bread, not "hording". Could you please someone correct this, I am new at Wiki and don't want to edit the text proper. Thank you! 21:30, 24 April 2008 (UTC) BlueSkies999

Done. Stacymckenna (talk) 03:11, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

'Personality' section needed
I was just look for particular points in relation to Marie Antoinette's personality, etc. and I was impressed with the article but I think that it could be improved with the addition of a dedicated 'Personality' section, similar to that in Louis XVI. I know that there is relevant personality info in the article, it's just that it would take a lot of work to find it. I'd do it, but I do not know nearly enough about Marie Antoinette to do it.

Thanks, Daniel99091 (talk) 05:10, 25 April 2008 (UTC).
 * Actually, that section makes clear why we should not do any such thing. Which view of her perosnality do we give? The social butterfly? the beloved martyr? The tactless Austrian agent? All can be sourced. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 05:26, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Marie Antoinette's
I just added:


 * Online catalog of Marie Antoinette's personal reading library from the Petit-Trianon palace, based on 1863 printed catalog, online at LibraryThing.

As noted in the edit comment, I was the creator of the website LibraryThing, although I have not been very involved in this particular project, which was instigated by a member. I am aware that links of this sort are frowned upon, although not strictly forbidden.

I am going to be posting over there, in the "I See Dead People['s Books]" group (http://www.librarything.com/groups/iseedeadpeoplesbooks) about the lack of links from Wikipedia articles to LibraryThing's many legacy libraries. It is my contention that someone's books are a very interesting window into their life. This is, of course, why scholars have compiled printed catalogs of famous people's libraries for centuries, so it is not a new thing. Putting collections online allows easier access and some features—such as an easy way to compare the libraries of Marie Antonette and others. (See http://www.librarything.com/profile/MarieAntoinette/stats/legacy). I think links to LibraryThing—and to others, if others emerge—are a good idea, and defensible within the context of a Wikipedia article.

I'd be interested to know what the latent community around Marie Antoinette thinks of this idea, and of the link. Needless to say, I put the link up, but I am not going to defend it against removal. Lectiodifficilior (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 19:29, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

her sisters and brothers
Snabela93 (talk) 15:18, 28 May 2008 (UTC) it says that she was the 15. child but on her mothers "site" it says she was the 16. child

Blimey
I've never seen such a biased article on Wikipedia. Mark J (talk) 16:56, 2 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Is that all you posted to say? When there are several other sections about this? If you think it's biased stop complaining or do something about it. If you are unwilling, then don't waste everyone's time. Ayashe (talk) 09:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Cake Clarification
I'm reading a lot of the posts about the cake comment, and most are missing why "let them eat cake," even though she didn't say it, was so offensive to the french people. Within the context that it was purported, "cake" or "brioche" was not referring to a chocolate birthday cake or even common bread - there was already a bread shortage. "Brioche" in context was referring rather to the black, chalky residue left behind in the ovens AFTER baking. So nonchalantly telling a bread-deprived public to "eat cake" (remembering what actual "cake" was being suggested) would have been incredibly offensive and ignorant. ~ Vibi4Rilla —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vibi4Rilla (talk • contribs) 13:47, 4 July 2008 (UTC)


 * The idea that the quote refers to the overcooked batter lining of the ovens, has been shown to be an unlikely interpretation--see:


 * http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/550/did-marie-antoinette-really-say-let-them-eat-cake


 * The quote uses the term brioche, which far more sources show is, and was at the time, a term used far more often to refer to a kind of sweet bread, or even a pastry. Since it's known that Marie Antoinette didn't hold her "subjects" in such disregard, regardless of what some of them said about her, it's a more reasonable theory to see the quote as a suggestion that, during a shortage of regular bread, the people should be able to eat the supposedly remaining form of cooked wheat that might still be at the baker's, pastry, even if it would be a monetary loss for the baker.JohnSawyer (talk) 21:18, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Dispute
What's the nature of the dispute over this article? And, regarding the last posting, if she did not say "Let them eat cake", (and she didn't), why does it matter what it meant? Spoonkymonkey (talk) 23:53, 29 August 2008 (UTC)


 * 24.144.93.98 (talk) 03:18, 22 October 2008 (UTC)Because she has been stigmatized with saying the line "let them eat cake" believed to insinuate that she didn't care about the people of France when in fact she cared very deeply about the people. It matters to the point of setting the record straight (as it were) that she wasn't the unthoughtful monster she has been made out to be.

mixed date formats
Please note that I've made them consistently international. Please buzz me if this is against consensus. Tony  (talk)  12:16, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

mixed date formats
Please note that I've made them consistently US. Please buzz me if this is against consensus. Tony  (talk)  12:16, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

hey about the cake
what are you talking about?!?! of course she said "let them eat cake"! duh! if she didn't then who did? im just saying that why are you making such a big deal over the cake issue? it's insane! she said let them eat cake! its in school books and history books! Guest  (talk)  12:16, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't know if this saying is correct or not, but if it is and you are saying it is in books, give us a citation of a credible source so we can verify it. If saying something is so, made it so, I would announce myself king. and maybe if I had time declare the end of world hunger disease and such.   Have to give the people something so they don't realize I took all their stuff :-) Abernaki (talk) 02:00, 4 October 2008 (UTC)


 * There is considerable evidence that the expression is misattributed to Marie Antoinette, and possibly wholly a construction of the imagination of political agitators. For one thing, references to the expression predate Marie Antoinette's reign.  For another, her brother-in-law is on record referring to it as having been attributed to an ancestress of his.  As for why reports that she said such a thing were incendiary, France was experiencing major food shortages at the time, and the bread shortage was acute.  Brioche was a luxury item, a richer bread, so by reporting that Marie Antoinette had prescribed it as a solution to the people's hunger, the libelistes were portraying her as callous, tone-deaf, or both. JnfrBKenney (talk) 04:00, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * JBK: Having written on this until my fingers get stiff, I have come to realise this libel is so deeply rooted that it will keep on going like a tumbleweed until the end of times.  As Beaumarchais wrote:  «Calomniez, calomniez, il en restera toujours quelque chose.» Besides, when JJ Rousseau put the phrase in his Confessions, he did not name the princess who supposedly uttered it, so the phrase could very well be Rousseau's creation.  Rousseau was not a historian, he was a writer with a wild imagination.  Frania W. (talk) 13:46, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Axel von Fersen
Isn't it amusing somehow, that her alleged sexual relationship with Fersen is always denied by everyone who sympathise with her? Everyone who likes her, say it is terrible slander, as if it would be wrong for a woman in an arranged marriage to have a lover. It is just natural. For her own happiness sake, I hope she did have lovers. In those days, it was considered wrong, but now, we should be more modern about this. I do hope they would do a DNA test on her son someday. I know they have, but if there is possible to do one who shows the fatherhood, I hope they will do one. If it is possible, I wonder why the havent? Are they affraid for what it will show? It doesnt have to proove anything, of course: even if they had sex, they didn't have to have children toghether, so her son could be the son of the king anywhay. But if he prooves to be the son of Fersen, then perhaps historians could aknowledge the fact that it is just natural and human to have a lover in an arranged marriage, and that it doesnt make her a bad person. It simply seems to me, that historians make the alleged affair to slander, because they believe this would make her to a bad person. Not so strange, perhaps, because the debate started in a time when the moral values had this view. If they are prooved to be lovers by such a test, then perhaps this old view of the subject will change to a more modern one. Just an observation! --85.226.41.61 (talk) 14:37, 14 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Most people who sympathise with her do so because they can see beyond the propaganda and stereotypes/libelles that continue to overshadow her image. This is the case with the Fersen affair theory. Marie-Antoinette was a devout Roman Catholic who, despite the actions of many around her, remained steadfast in her religious beliefs, in addition to remaining loyal to her husband. She attended daily masses and regularly went to confession. In addition, her life was incredibly public. Even at Trianon, she was still attended by numerous servants, friends, and others. An affair was contrary to everything she had been taught. Based on what is known of this aspect of her life, an affair seems unlikely. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.239.158.132 (talk) 00:45, 24 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Of course she visited the masses and went to confession, she was a queen and expected to do so. Of course religious people think she was a devout Catholic, because they wish to keep their image of her as a martyr queen. Every woman in those days were thaught that is was wrong to be unfaithful, even if their husband's were, and that was terrible - Everyone have the right to love. Her sisters are also rumored to have had lovers, (which is not at all so contested), and they were brought up as she, and her mother said that neither she nor them did their mother's ideas any credit. Which was a positive thing, as it gave them the possibility to experience love! I really think it is about time to look upon the subject in a new way. A modern, more merciful way. I think it is wrong to say that her name is blackened by the rumor that she had lovers. That is a terrible point of view on human emotions. It is very sad that some people think that religious ideologys are more important than love. --85.226.47.10 (talk) 20:23, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Two articles stating two different things
This article is in contradiction with the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princesse_de_Lamballe regarding weather Marie-Antoinette actually saw the impaled head of her friend. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.40.88.115 (talk) 22:20, 27 November 2008 (UTC)


 * The article on the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princesse_de_Lamballe is filled with inexactitudes & often based on dubious sources usually not accepted by historians. Marie Antoinette did not see the head of her friend on a spike but probably did faint when made aware of what was happening outside her window.  Frania W. (talk) 23:45, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Article difficult to read
This article reads like a high school paper, using too many unimportant details & peacock words (*decadent* *famous* *outrageous* etc.), and, my main critic, being based on only one book, that of Mme Fraser, which it parrots. In many instances, much liberty is taken vs historical truth, for instance, the story of the *homeless boy*: the boy's father had been run over by a carriage & the queen adopted the very young child with the consent of his grandmother. Another instance: Marie Antoinette not recognising her son as the new king. This is very doubtful as the tradition was to acclaim the new king the minute the previous one died, and it is impossible to think that Marie Antoinette & Mme Elisabeth did not recognise the Dauphin as Louis XVII when they learned that Louis XVI had been decapitated. Then, there was nothing wrong (as is implied) with the comte de Provence in exile *proclaiming* himself Régent. Since his nephew, the new king in the eyes of the royalists, was minor & prisoner in the Temple, Provence was the Régent, even if this would not have been the choice of Louis XVI, who could not do anything about it since he was dead.

Caption under photograph of grounds laying in a western direction in front of castle of Versailles, reading ***Marie Antoinette spent tremendous amounts of money on gardening Versailles' vast grounds; however, she eventually cut back on the expenses, realizing what a detriment it was financially.*** is totally false as Marie Antoinette had nothing to do with work in the gardens at Versailles. Her only participation in (garden) change, work & expense was what she ordered her gardener Richard Mique to do at Le Petit Trianon, i.e. Le Hameau. The gardens of Versailles were a separate entity financially borne by the Crown. Besides, works done on the grounds of Versailles during the reign of Louis XVI were not on the scale of those done under Louis XIV. Louis XVI undertook the restoration of the park & gardens by ordering replacing of centuries old trees ready to fall or fallen during storms at the beginning of the reign of Louis XV which had never been replanted. My suggestion is to remove this photograph with its inaccurate caption, and which has nothing to do with Marie Antoinette. Furthermore, why should a modern photograph of the park be used when we have the opportunity to illustrate this article with a late 18th century view of the gardens at Versailles ?

Article needs a major overhaul, i.e. rewriting - for which I shall not volunteer because I cannot touch it anymore, too much of a task that would be undone by readers of romans à l'eau de rose !!! Frania W. (talk) 04:23, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Beautiful?
About the small edit I just made: "Beauty" was in quotes, I suppose because whoever wrote that section disagreed with the perception of Marie Antoinette as beautiful - presumably because she doesn't fit with modern western beauty standards. However, I'd like to point out that the concept of beauty does change a bit from era to era; and since she was almost universally admired as attractive in her day, her beauty is as objective as any of our modern pop icons'. The beauty standards of those times favored fair skin and hair; large blue eyes; small mouth; high brow; straight, smallish nose; elegant height; and a shapely, curved figure. Marie Antoinette had all those things and even today presents a compelling facial appearance, even despite her large Habsburg jaw. Because of this, I don't think it's appropriate to refer to her "beauty" in quotation marks any more than you would use them for Carmen Electra's, Angelina Jolie's or Portia DeRossi's. So I've removed the quotes. Succubus MacAstaroth (talk) 03:59, 7 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Succubus MacAstaroth: Why change from *lip* to *jaw* since both are correct in the description of maxillary prognathism? Here is an excerpt from the Habsburg jaw The condition colloquially is known as Habsburg jaw, Habsburg lip or Austrian Lip (see Habsburg) due to its prevalence in that bloodline.[4] The trait is easily traceable in portraits of Habsburg family members.[...]


 * In German, it is called Habsburger Unterlippe http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habsburger_Unterlippe, and in French lèvre autrichienne.


 * Habsburg jaw sounds so harsh! If you want to change, then why not use the more scientific prognathism or maxillary prognathism?  If not, then put *lip* back.  Frania W. (talk) 15:50, 7 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Honestly, I just didn't think Wikipedia was a place for euphemisms. You can clearly see from all her portraits that it was her jaw which was misshapen, not her lip. Therefore, "Habsburg lip" would be a misnomer. I'm also against simply calling it prognathism in this article, because Marie Antoinette was in fact a Habsburg. Her Habsburg jaw was literally THE Habsburg jaw, inherited from her Habsburg family. It couldn't be more straightforward. Succubus MacAstaroth (talk) 00:51, 7 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Succubus:


 * By the way, are not both "Habsburg jaw" & "Habsburg lip" euphemisms for "mandibular prognathism"?


 * Before writing the above comment, I checked the wiki article on Habsburg jaw, which brings you directly to the section Mandibular prognathism (progenism) in the Prognathism article, in which it is stated: "The condition colloquially is known as Habsburg jaw, Habsburg lip or Austrian Lip[...]".  Please note the word "colloquially" in front of the three appellations, while the non-colloquial expression is "mandibular prognathism".  So, colloquially speaking, my lip seems to have as much right to be as your jaw ! (^+^)


 * The reason of giving the various German names -which I should have put in a footnote- was only to show what the condition is called in that language, which happens to be close enough to English for en:wiki readers to understand. MA was from a German-speaking country, so inserting a German expression that describes her condition could not be too foreign to the subject.


 * Now that we had our little discussion, please feel free to revert to what you prefer. This is not something for which I would go to war.


 * Best to you, Frania W. (talk) 04:30, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Removing images
I was bold and decided to remove the unnecessary images. They made the article huge and unreadable. Please discuss at the talk page before adding more images. Surtsicna (talk) 20:46, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Surtsicna: Of all the images you are choosing to remove, why remove David's drawing of Marie Antoinette on her way to the guillotine (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jacques-Louis_David_-_Marie_Antoinette_on_the_Way_to_the_Guillotine.jpg), replacing it by a totally fantasist portrait done in the 19th century? Of all her portraits, this is the most dramatic, moving & realistically cruel because done with no sympathy to this woman.  It also happens to be the very last one done of her as she had only a few minutes to live.  I hope others who are following your transformation of the article will agree with me.  Cordialement,  Frania W. (talk) 18:23, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I have replaced it with another image only because I though that another image is nicer (and that was obviously a mistake). If the previous image was more notable or historically more accurate, please feel free to restore it! Could you please also check other images included in the article? It seems to me that there should be less portraits of Marie-Antoinette and more portraits of people relevant to this article. Surtsicna (talk) 18:52, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * As much as I would like to restore it, I must confess that... I do not know how to do it, so would you be so kind & do it? Thanking you in advance.
 * I have not re-read the article in depth because you are in the process of cleaning it up. I personally appreciate your lightening it by removing trivia & creating sub-articles, such as Marie Antoinette in popular culture.
 * Will see what other pictures I can find. Frania W. (talk) 19:11, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I have restored the image. I admitt that I removed it just because the other one was more colourfull :) I think that we should replace some portraits of Marie Antoinette with portraits of her husband, son, madame du Barry, duchesse de Polignac, and other people who played important roles in her life. Their portraits can be easily found on their respective Wiki pages. Surtsicna (talk) 19:36, 22 January 2009 (UTC)-
 * I discovered a site Marie Antoinette Online with many pictures, some modern to avoid, but others that could be of interest.
 * http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/
 * Once you get started, you click on smaller picture under heading Random image on left & will get the next picture, etc. and keep going even if a picture already shown reappears, there are modern ones to skip, OR, you change the number on the link:
 * Here are a few:
 * Le collier de la Reine: http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=256
 * La prise des Tuileries: http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=182
 * Francis de Lorraine, her father: http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=50
 * Medal of Marie Antoinette & Louis XVI: http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=233
 * 1781 Medal of MA: http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=323
 * MA & princesse de Lamballe's hair in a ring: http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=348
 * Varennes: http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=63
 * MA dans le parc de Versailles, rarely seen, by Vigée-Lebrun: http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=116
 * Madame du Barry: http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=229
 * Madame Elisabeth, sœur de Louis XVI: http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=129
 * MA, Louis XVI & her brother Joseph: http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=28
 * Antoinette's Bedchamber Invaded: http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=77
 * Count Axel Fersen: http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=104
 * Journées des 5 et 6 Octobre 1789: http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=179
 * Arrivée de la Famille Royale à Paris, le 6 Octobre 1789.: http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=180
 * Dernier billet de la Reine (16 octobre 1793): http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=246
 * Le Comte d'Artois: http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=254
 * Tête de Marie-Antoinette (16 octobre 1793): http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=274  Surtsicna:  Drawing by David of MA's head after her execution.  I do not suggest we use it, but I wanted you to see it.  FW
 * Marie Antoinette's last letter ...to Madame Elisabeth, first page: http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=289
 * Marie Antoinette's last letter to Madame Elisabeth, page 2: http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=290
 * Last Letter, page 3: http://www.marie-antoinette.org/gallery/details.php?image_id=291
 * There are three pictures of Fersen on de:wiki: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Axel_von_Fersen


 * Have fun! Frania W. (talk) 22:24, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for informing me about that page! We should certainly put it among the external links. However, most of those images are already at the Commons. I would like to include the image of Marie Antoinette and Louis XVI receiving visit from her brother, but which brother was it and when did he visit them? This article says they were visited by Joseph II, but the image is described as Marie Antoinette, the Archduke Maximilian and Louis XVI. Furthermore, the article about Archduke Maximilian Franz of Austria has this image. It is possible that both Joseph and Maximilian Francis visited her, but when did the latter's visit occur (the image should be added to the relevant section, so I need the date)? Surtsicna (talk) 13:29, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The visit of Maximilian was on 7 February 1775 at the château de la Muette. Have to find it in a book in order to give reference.
 * Please note that in this portrait, Louis XVI, who was twenty years old, appears quite tall, contrary to the tales running about his height. Frania W. (talk) 14:37, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

The return of "Let them eat cake"
I notice that the body text of the article currently mentions nothing about the supposed quote "Let them eat cake". There's just a reference at the very bottom, in the External Links section, to an article that explains it well enough. Was the quote removed from the body of the article at some point due to the controversy over how to mention it? I apologize for not having the time to go over the edit history to find out. If the quote was removed from the article, except for the reference at the end, I find that an excessive solution, since the fact that she almost certainly didn't say it, doesn't mean the French populace at the time didn't believe she said it, if indeed it was a rumor at the time--that's the more relevant issue. Removing a quote falsely attributed to a person, when belief, at the time, in that supposed quote had a lot of impact on that person's life, is a form of current-day censorship. There are relevant references to so many other libelles in the article--why remove the most notable one? But even if the misquote rumor began circulating only some time after Marie Antoinette's death, it would still seem relevant to include it at this point in the article, due to how attached it became to popular ideas about her for quite a few years, however unjustly.

Compounding the confusion in our discussion about this, is that so far I haven't found any sources that prove this misquote was actually circulating at the time Marie Antoinette supposedly uttered it. None of the comments above seems to really contain that information. Does anyone know if the misquote was attributed after Marie Antoinette's death, and if so, about when? If the rumor started during her lifetime, it seems it would have been some time during the winter of 1788-1789, when the cold weather damaged the wheat crop (it would be nice to pinpoint the start of this rumor even more precisely). If that's the case, then I suggest (re)adding mention of this rumor in the section titled "1786–June 1789: Real political influence", inserted after the sentence:

"Her prediction began to come true when bread prices started to rise due to the severe 1788–1789 winter."

Any input on this? JohnSawyer (talk) 14:00, 24 January 2009 (UTC)


 * JohnSawyer wrote above: "Compounding the confusion in our discussion about this, is that so far I haven't found any sources that prove this misquote was actually circulating at the time Marie Antoinette supposedly uttered it."  JS, I have been looking into this for a long time. Because of the many novels supposed to be based on true history written about Marie Antoinette, it is very difficult to separate legend from reality.  Hope to get to the truth in time.  If you look at the history of the article,  I may be the one who removed the quote & put it in a footnote, probably because it was written as if she had said it.  Also see my comment in *The "cake" question* above.  So many errors & quotes of fairy tales have gone into this article!  I came to the point of not wanting to read it any more... but keep going back to it & editing it.  One of my main objections, as you may have read somewhere above (you seem to have read & re-organised the whole discussion page), my main objection is that this article is based at 99.99 per cent on Fraser's book.  It would have been better to have Mme Fraser write the article!  The result may not have been more exact, but better written.  Frania W. (talk) 22:00, 24 January 2009 (UTC)


 * JS: If you have Fraser's Marie Antoinette, The Journey - which I decided to buy since it is the only reference in this article & I wanted to know what it was all about - there is an interesting mention of the *Let them eat cake* controversy - too long to put here. It is on p. 135 of Fraser's book, published by Anchor Books (Am. edition in 2002).  Fraser begins the *cake* paragraph with:  "Now, if at all, during the period of the Flour War, was the occasion when Marie Antoinette might have uttered the notorious phrase:... Qu'ils mangent de la brioche.  Instead, she indulged to her mother in a piece of reflection on the duties of royalty.  Its tenor was the exact opposite of that phrase, at once callous and ignorant, so often ascribed to her. [...].  In fact, that lethal phrase had been known for at least a century previously..."  I am still unable to find when the phrase was put in MA's mouth.  NOTE:  The Flour War took place in the spring of 1775.  Frania W. (talk) 23:15, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

subject's now-centuries-old weeping beech toppled
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h35-xAS82HA7tgUjRJeq8Edt2lZAD95VI7400 (also in nytimes printed late edition jan. 28, 2009) - tree planted in 1786; toppled in recent (2009) winter storm.

article also mentions longevity of another of her plantings - an oak that met its demise from horrific heat wave in 2003. perhaps sentence(s) could be added (or to article on versailles itself)--98.116.115.220 (talk) 17:40, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

I just have one thing
How come Marie Antoinette was executed? The real reason why it happened? I have read the articles on the issue and they all pretty much say the same thing that she died due the lies about her having sexual intercourse with her son... We all know that she would not do that for she loved all her children more than her own life... I have also watched the movie of Marie Antoinette and that never says anything about the reason why she died... If someone in here knows the real reason why she died could they please apply that information on here for the world to see it... Thank you...letthemeatcake28 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Letthemeatcake28 (talk • contribs) 18:54, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Maria Theresa, Marie Antoinette's mother, never really paid any attention to her youngest daughter. Yes, Maria Theresa knew that Marie Antoinette would one day be Queen of France, but Maria Theresa was too busy with her other older children to pay much attention to her youngest daughter. When Marie Antoinette was fourteen, she was bought to the French Court, and became Queen, and ruled over the most elegant, lavish, expensive court in all of Europe. She was executed because she wanted France to stay a monarchy, and tried to rally help from all over Europe, and the French were afraid of that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.162.64.105 (talk) 21:29, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Page move
I've reverted an undiscussed page move, from "Marie Antoinette" to "Marie Antoinette of Austria". The shorter name is almost certainly more common. But whatever name is best it should be discussed and agreed upon before moving again.  Will Beback   talk    06:15, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Title
I was contemplating that the addition of "consort" to Anotine's title of Queen of France and of Navarre is unnecessary ,because, the Queen of France is never anything but a consort (due to the male only succesion laws of the Kingdom of France), therefore, you don't need to specify. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.107.217.71 (talk) 00:18, 10 May 2009 (UTC)