ŷ������

Not only does Antonia Frasier dispell the rumor that Marie Antoinette ever uttered “let them eat cake�� when told that the French were starved for bread, she gives a fuller picture of the queen that shows her more than just an extravagant self-involved royal out-of-touch with reality. Frasier packs in gossipy details that keep this from being a dry read.
Marie Antoinette is born to be a pawn in her mother’s (Hapsburg Empress Maria Theresa) bid to expand Hapsburg power and influence. At the age of 14, a deal is cut for Antoine to marry the future king of France, sealing an alliance between the two empires. Immediately, preparations begin to prepare her for the marriage. Since birth, Marie Antoinette, like all good royal girls, is groomed to be a feminine and submissive royal wife, with lessons in dance, music and etiquette - unfortunately she is otherwise poorly educated, even by 18th century standards.
At 15, she is wed to the French dauphin and shipped to France, where she is expected, (with not-so-gentle prodding by her mother and the French royal court) to deliver a future king. Until she delivers, her position in France is uncertain.
Frasier details the early struggles of the teenage couple’s marriage and the years it took them to finally consummate it, while painting a vivid picture of royal life with the full court. Marie Antoinette is dressed by ladies in waiting, who get to help based on rank. The royals are crazy �� her mother through Antoinette’s servants monitors her monthly periods, others knew the details about when the queen and king tried or had sex. When she finally gives birth, it’s before a gathering of those invited based on rank. Of course, in 18th century France, these were all matters of national importance indicating the future direction of the country. It goes a long way to explaining why Marie Antionette and Louis XVI were so unprepared when they became king and queen. They were born to rule �� via a trusted circle of advisers, of course �� but when the rules changed after the French Revolution, neither Louis nor Marie Antionette (who apparently had little influence in her husband’s political decisions) were bright enough politicians or visionary enough to see a new role for the monarchy and instead fought every measure to limit their power, eventually even trying to get Austria to send in troops to help restore them to the throne.
By the time the revolution rolls around, Frasier has drunken the kool-aid and is fully on the King and Queen’s side, explaining why the royals did what they did. Whether it be trying to preserve the King’s power or their eventual failed escape from Paris, she paints a picture of a king and queen who were devoted to their children and believed the future of France was best served by keeping the king in power. It would have been interesting to get more perspective on the problems going on in the country and whether the King and Queen were totally disconnected as at least Marie Antionette seemed to be.
The French Revolution was bloody and eventually led to leaders killing previous leaders in a near-continual cleansing and it’s easy to believe that by the time of King Louis�� execution and then Marie Antoinette’s that revolution leaders had gone too far. Even Thomas Paine argued that the family should be allowed to leave the country and resettle in America. Because Frasier seems to be so behind the royal cause doomed to history, it’s hard to feel like an impartial observer and I at times ended up arguing with the book for its characterization of the King and Queen’s actions, which comes off as a defense. Frasier gives great insight into Marie Antionette’s life and experience up to the end, but she doesn’t apply her critical eye to their actions leading to the revolution and during it. At the same time, she (rightfully) doesn’t spare the revolutionaries.