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

The king
http://forum.marie-antoinette.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=53
Page 5 of 6

Author:  doritmi [ Tue Mar 27, 2007 9:42 pm ]
Post subject:  it's all about image, and his was bad

I agree with de Batz. Louis' greatest fault was that he was unable to create and maintain a positive image of himself. bad propaganda. He could not project well.
The only problem, though, with giving up some of his power was that Louis XVI, that so conscientous monarch, was well aware that it wasn't only his power he was giving away - it was the power of his heirs, too. and that was not easy.

Author:  oceane [ Tue Mar 27, 2007 10:41 pm ]
Post subject: 

As much as i hate to fault the King, i do agree with what Batz said . That was wonderfully written by the way , you really summed it up !

He was in a very difficult position and had alot of people's interest in mind, so naturally you would conflicted. I think he only didnt want to give up the monarchy
1. because it was something that he had grown up with
and 2. because he genuinely cared for the people and felt he was their father - he did not want to give up trying to help them. Which for a man like him is understandable.
I think that, although it is true that he could have put out a good word about himself through the grapevine- he was much more of an action, rather than talk person- and wanted to be be liked and popular for his actions... which for a very long time - he was.
I do believe that he was a suitable monarch, and probably the wisest and most noble ever to sit on the French throne, but at the end of an era, it is extremely hard to govern well. I think he did better than most people would have in his situation, considering his circumstances and personality. In the end, although he did make some mistakes, i can only admire him as a monarch and as a person.

Author:  alisa [ Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:42 pm ]
Post subject: 

I think that he was kind and had good intentions but he didn't know how to rule well.
He didn't make a great king, because he wasn't aggressive.
But who really knows?
Unless you were alive in the 18th C.

Author:  Louis-Charles [ Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:46 pm ]
Post subject: 

Quote:
He didn't make a great king, because he wasn't aggressive.

For me Louis XVI has been a great king. It was the only (or almost) to have tried reforms for the people, and who did not succumb to the vice…. The revolution would have taken place even with another King like Louis XIV :wink:

Author:  doritmi [ Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:50 pm ]
Post subject:  another king?

probably, but another king may have handled the 3rd estate in 1789 better than the depressed Louis XVI, who had been banging his head against a wall trying to reform the system for 15 years.

Author:  Louis-Charles [ Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:55 pm ]
Post subject: 

Louis XVI had granted the vote per person for the people during the States General in May 1789… he did what the people wanted….but he had also the nobility against him…
A Louis XIV would have used the force… I am skeptic for the consequences :?

Author:  alisa [ Wed Mar 28, 2007 7:07 pm ]
Post subject: 

In my opinion, Napoleon was a brilliant person and an amazing ruler.

Author:  doritmi [ Wed Mar 28, 2007 7:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Louis XIV v. Napoleon

Louis Charles, I agree with you, and share your concerns. on one hand, the French kings have been dealing with popular risings for centuries, and violence almost always was the method. on the other hand, given the atmosphere and the hope for reforms, and the strong fever, violence may not have worked.

alisa, Napoleon was brilliant, but he was also brusque, meglomeniac, selfish to the extreme, and war loving. if he kept to ruling France, he would probably have done a good job. but he caused endless misery and suffering in France and in Europe with his wars.

Author:  Louis-Charles [ Wed Mar 28, 2007 7:24 pm ]
Post subject: 

Indeed doritmi I agree :wink:

Author:  alisa [ Wed Mar 28, 2007 7:25 pm ]
Post subject: 

I agree.
Napoleon was selfish and a war-lover.
But he was so smart, he just had a way.
I really hate it when people compare him to Hitler, because I don't think Napoleon was THAT extreme.

Author:  fille mignnone [ Sat Jun 16, 2007 6:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Louis and a mistress

Louis refused to have a mistress even though it was a fad at the time. As long as it was kept discreet it was acceptable. They encouraged Louis XVI to have a mistress but he refused. He really loved Marie Antoinette and their children. When he was kept in the Tower with Louis-Charles, he brought it upon himself to teach him.

Author:  Louis-Charles [ Sat Jun 16, 2007 10:22 pm ]
Post subject: 

Exact you're right!

Louis XVI was a king who never had mistresses...it was very rare! :D

Author:  Marie-Antoinette [ Wed Jun 20, 2007 1:43 am ]
Post subject: 

I think Louis was a good king..and yet he did need some guidance. He was not horrible but there were some sticky ends more so. :wink: ....but other than that he was as fine a king as any..and rather charming in my oppinion. :D

Author:  Lux [ Sun Mar 30, 2008 5:13 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The king

Did anyone watch the John Adams mini series on HBO? Louis XVI made an apperance in episode three. Although brief I don't think it represented Louis Auguste at all. What is your oppinion

Author:  Lux [ Sun Mar 30, 2008 5:21 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The king

I think Louis the XVI was a king with good intentions but not a king ready to handle a revolution. Had he been born at another time he could have been known as a benevolent ruler. Any king at that time would have been hard pressed to deal with the growing sentiment of a revolution. I think he was born at the right place at the wrong time. And his wife Marie Antoinette could have been known as one of the best queens of France. But unfortunately she was a queen at a time when France did not want a queen but a republic

Page 5 of 6 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/