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

Richest European King?
http://forum.marie-antoinette.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=298
Page 1 of 2

Author:  Jules de Polignac [ Fri Sep 15, 2006 10:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Richest European King?

Was the Royal French Crown the richest in Europe in the second half of the XVIII century? If it wasn't, what crown was the richest? The Russian Emperor, the Austrian or maybe the English king? I know that it wasn't the portuguese! :roll:

I guess it was the russian emperor, and not Louis XVI...

Louis XVI was a simple man, unlike his wife how enjoyed a good party! Even so, Louis XVI had a fabulose fortune, as we know!

Did the royal family have an allowance, or did the royal family have control to all the french money?

Author:  Therese [ Fri Sep 15, 2006 11:07 pm ]
Post subject: 

The tsar/tsarina of Russia was the richest ruler in Europe. The French royal family had income from many private estates owned by them as well as tax revenue. No, they did not control all the French money - they would not have had such trouble with debt if they did.

Author:  LMTAntoinette [ Fri Nov 24, 2006 1:23 am ]
Post subject: 

Therese wrote:
The tsar/tsarina of Russia was the richest ruler in Europe. The French royal family had income from many private estates owned by them as well as tax revenue. No, they did not control all the French money - they would not have had such trouble with debt if they did.


As I understand it, Louis XVI didn't have enough money from any source to repay the debts of his father and grandfather. Being in debt like that to me is not being "rich". But he had enough to pay for Antoinette's luxuries :-)

Author:  Therese [ Fri Nov 24, 2006 8:24 pm ]
Post subject: 

The problem was not Antoinette's luxuries, which were minimal in the larger scope of things. People complained when the queen did not dress and entertain the way a queen was expected. The problem was that France was still operating on a feudal system in which the richest citizens (the wealthy nobles and the wealthy clergy) were exempt from taxation. If each of them had been taxed minimally it would have salvaged the French economy, according to Nesta Webster. And that was Louis XVI's plan when he summoned the Estates-General.

Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette cut back household expenses dramatically during their reign.

Louis XVI was still wealthy because of his assets in real estate, if nothing else. He was cash poor, but he owned Versailles. It was a society based on land holdings, not on bank accounts.

Author:  Monsieur Royale [ Fri Nov 24, 2006 10:30 pm ]
Post subject: 

Its so interesting Louis XVI trys to reform and tax the wealthy so the peasents revolt. :?
How people see the French Revolution as a good thing is beyond me

Author:  Louis-Charles [ Fri Nov 24, 2006 10:38 pm ]
Post subject: 

The people did not really understand the reforms of Louis XVI and people did not know his reforms: they were misled by certain extremists who convinced them that Louis XVI wanted their misfortune :?

Author:  Therese [ Fri Nov 24, 2006 11:07 pm ]
Post subject: 

That is exactly true. The people were constantly being told the king was their enemy. Even then, they could not totally destroy the love between the people and the king, which is why the worst propaganda was focused on the queen. The fomenters of Revolution, according to Webster, had hoped that the queen would be killed on Oct 6 because the king would then be bereft of her courage and decisiveness.

Author:  Monsieur Royale [ Fri Nov 24, 2006 11:11 pm ]
Post subject: 

oh I know they were lied to (Provence and Orleans can probly take a lot of the credit) but how anyone can teach it as a good thing is beyonfd me. Like school history teachers do

Author:  Louis-Charles [ Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:39 am ]
Post subject: 

Ah I agree Monsieur Royale, the lesson of history defend too the revolution... I deplore that too :?

Author:  LMTAntoinette [ Sun Nov 26, 2006 5:45 pm ]
Post subject: 

Louis-Charles wrote:
Ah I agree Monsieur Royale, the lesson of history defend too the revolution... I deplore that too :?


One man's medicine is another man's poison... The Revolution was not so good for the Royal Family, but it was good for the faction that revolted.

I haven't read far enough into French history to learn what came next. What I know of it, I'm just now learning from the internet. As a school girl in the US, (1940- 1953) I didn't learn much. I'm looking at it now because I've learned that Louis sent aid to the Americans during our revolution. And whether today I'm in a better situation because the Americans won, who knows??? It happened the way it happened.

Author:  Pimprenelle [ Sun Nov 26, 2006 6:14 pm ]
Post subject: 

For sure... France spent paramount money to help the Americans find their autonomy. This was the main cause of French deficit, maybe... certainly more than the court extravagancies !

I am not so sure the French revolution was so good for the French people, after all... They had Napoleon just after, and another monarchy...

And, from the revolution itself, they most of all gained hunger, deaths, bloodsheds, slaughters, wars and more poverty.

In my view, the real revolution came after, and it was social. This finally gave equality to manhood... while waiting for another revolution that eventually gave rights to women also !

Author:  Louis-Charles [ Sun Nov 26, 2006 7:40 pm ]
Post subject: 

Indeed the war in America was too expensive for France, and weighed heavy in the causes of the Revolution.

I agree Pimprenelle, it would be necessary to let a thorough study to know if the revolution were good for France or not. But personally, I think that the revolution, if it was necessary, was very badly done, and it remains a shame for us, with respect to the royal family... I have shame awfully... :?
The revolutionists wanted to go too quickly, and they handled people with their own way :?

Author:  Pimprenelle [ Sun Nov 26, 2006 7:43 pm ]
Post subject: 

... a shame with regard to those thousands and thousands innocent people who were guillotined, slaughtered and murdered... :?

Author:  Louis-Charles [ Sun Nov 26, 2006 7:46 pm ]
Post subject: 

Exact... and the schoolbooks of history do not speak enough about it, or not... still a shame for our education...

Author:  Pimprenelle [ Sun Nov 26, 2006 8:21 pm ]
Post subject: 

History is written by winners...

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/