Marie Antoinette Online Forum
http://forum.marie-antoinette.org/

monarchy or MA?-
http://forum.marie-antoinette.org/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=695
Page 1 of 4

Author:  mayumi [ Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:31 pm ]
Post subject:  monarchy or MA?-

DO you love monarchy in general or only love MA?
i only love MA,i dont think country need king.Here in spain we have king and queen but many people dont like this,cause they spend very much money in things or works that just president or other people can do without all that money they need.what u think?

Author:  Louis-Charles [ Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:35 pm ]
Post subject: 

I agree with you mayumi :wink:

Author:  Monsieur Andre [ Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:46 pm ]
Post subject: 

Well I can't really give a good reply to this post because I'm interested in Marie Antoinette, but my views on monarchy in general, that is a different discussion. And then you have to get into the monarchies of each individual country etc. I suggest you start another post about monarchies exclusively, mayumi! :wink:

Author:  Elizabeth [ Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:48 pm ]
Post subject: 

I am just a beginner in studying history, so I can't really say definitively, although I feel there are some good points to a monarchy. Ultimately, I believe in democracy, but I have yet to see one that works very well! :wink:

Author:  Monsieur Andre [ Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:50 pm ]
Post subject: 

The U.S.'s works pretty well!

Author:  Elizabeth [ Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:55 pm ]
Post subject: 

Quote:
The U.S.'s works pretty well!
Yes, I agree that it does work, but it seems to fail in alot of ways also IMO. :wink:

Author:  Maria Antonia de France [ Tue Feb 27, 2007 12:37 am ]
Post subject: 

I believe that was nothing wrong with the monarchy just some of the people who were running it. all countries have a leader in some way,here in America the president is a king just without a crown and hated as much as MA :)

Author:  Therese [ Tue Feb 27, 2007 1:40 am ]
Post subject: 

Yes, an irresponsible president can be much worse than a prudent and wise monarch.

Author:  CATBOOTS [ Tue Feb 27, 2007 12:27 pm ]
Post subject:  History and Monarchy

As a student stduying history at University and this subject in particular. In answer to your question. It is not possible for us to view history in the present day terms. You have to aquaint yourself with the period. The quetion you have raised needs a great deal of consideration. Even today across the world, parts of the French Monarchy are apart of other Royal Houses and Presidencies in the sence of their cultural identity albeit with another name

Do not forget in your own Country you have the French Monarchy to thank for your independance and a president. America is covered by Federal law, which is quite different to monarchy. Federal law did exist in Europe in 1300s and as a result of this was joined together by kings and queens of Europe, as it actually failed. This is a core of failure in presidencies and can be higlighted by their short terms in office and continous policy not being adhered to as you would have in a Monarchy.

To understand Louis and MA you have to get to the nuts and bolts of the period to understand what was going on. To understand this the Burgundian Period, The hundred years war and the Dynasty of the English, French and Austrian Monarchy has to be understood. Even though France has a presidency there are still members of the monarchy who who help with official duties.

Sadly once the revolution had taken place and heads had been removed it took France many years to recover. The damage done can not be reapiared as one part of Lousi family led the revolution in to Paris so that line is objected to by royalists. Also the death of one of the other members of direct line was decapitated on a sking holiday within the last decade. I think the French would like a Monarchy but alas their are no direct blood lines. The blood lines came from St Lous and St Denis. This is why you need to understand the Capetian dynasty and the valois dynasty

Author:  Moose [ Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:53 pm ]
Post subject: 

I am not a monarchist in general, although I would not go as far as removing the head of a sitting monarch in order to get rid of them ;). Perhaps if I were a peasant in revolutionary France I would have been baying for the head of Marie Antoinette - who knows? It is easy with hindsight to have sympathy with people such as Louis and Antoinette and I do. But if I were starving and could not feed my family, I might very well have tried to scapegoat anyone that I possibly could.

Author:  Therese [ Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:55 pm ]
Post subject: 

Many of the French peasants were NOT starving until the Revolution starved them, and they fought for the king, especially in the Vendee.

Author:  Moose [ Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:58 pm ]
Post subject: 

City dwellers then :). PEasants was possibly the wrong term to use. I actually don't like the idea of violent revolution in any form and to achieve any end but I don't know what my perspective would have been if I had lived in that time and had believed the propaganda that was put about about the Royal family. I feel sympathy for them NOW because I have read many differing accounts of them and believe that they were probably reasonably decent people who were the victims of circumstance but what I would have believed THEN, had I been alive .. I just do not know.

Author:  Pimprenelle [ Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:33 am ]
Post subject: 

I am not interested at all in monarchy, and love Antoinette as a person.

Author:  CATBOOTS [ Thu Mar 01, 2007 11:34 am ]
Post subject:  Reply to French Monarchy

I would like to say that I am neither for or against monarchy. We make these statements so lightly and do not consider the ultimate situation. Countries are invented over long periods of time and to exist they have to have soverignity in judical, fiscal, cultural and administration. France had all of these. Louis that we know had a great deal to offer as a king. He was extremely proflific in making laws to try and modernise the country. From sources available he was one of the most prolific moderisers in the modern world.

Sadly due to revolution there are not a great deal of primary sources availbale to study and if there are, they are spread across the world. Do not forget this subject is new. It took one year to sell everyhting from Versailles from paintings down to the last spoon, thousands of people cued day in day out to buy something and litterally stripped france of its history, which is monarchy. That is why the building is empty. Anything is better than nothing. The people were not just against louis and MA they were against the establishment.

As I have said before this is one reason why the French will not restore the blood lines they have as in reality those people contributed in stripping the country of everything i.e. the Duke or Orleans and the Duke Provance. There were no bread shortages other than those caused by the Duke of Orleans and the sinister action of the Duke Provances printing press at versailles.

Monarchy is a part of national Identity and Lousi and MA got caught up in this, they coud not modernise fast enough. They were two very loving faithfull catholic people and Louis entertained Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson as he was so against slavery. There was no slavery in France like Britian.

France had done what it had to do, but recognised they had lost there identity in the people, as monarchy. That is why people fly from around the world to visit St Dennis to visit Louis and MA graves and pay respects, or if not respect a tourist attraction. The greatest repect is silent prayer which thousands have offerd to these two people.

Author:  Moose [ Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm ]
Post subject: 

I do not make a statement about monarchy lightly. I do not like it as an institution. I can give my reasons why if anyone is interested ;).

Page 1 of 4 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/