Brother to the Sun King: Philippe, Duke of Orleans

by Nancy Nichols Barker

In battle he fought with legendary valor . . . At court, dressed in silks and ribbons, he openly favored his male lovers . . . Despised but feared by his brother, he was the perpetual loser in a lifelong sibling rivalry . . . "Philippe, brother of Louis XIV, might have been a prince of great renown in the service of the king―had the king only shown him his faith and trust. . . . This is an excellent book. I congratulate the author on a work that is objective and of high quality." Henry, Count of Paris

Genres: History, Biography, Nonfiction, France, 17th Century, LGBT, Royalty

368 pages, Paperback

First published March 1, 1989

About the author

A specialist in French diplomatic history, Nancy Nichols Barker was a professor of history at the University of Texas at Austin.

Reviews

[Yooperprof · Rating 3 out of 5]

First to acknowledge the many real virtues of Barker's biographical sketch of the younger brother of Louis XIV. The author has done solid research and mounts plausible arguments to demonstrate financial intelligence and real military accomplishments on the part of a historical figure who is often derided or neglected. Based on her exploration of contemporary accounts - and the extensive Orleans family account books - it becomes clear that the later financial independence and power of the Orleans cadet branch of the Bourbon dynasty had its roots in policies and practiced advocated by the Philippe, the Duke of Orleans.

The down side is Barker's treatment of Philippe's sexuality, which is rooted in a Freudian psychoanalytical approach which has not held up well since the time of the book's publication. "Brother to the Sun King" was published in 1989, and it shows. While Barker deserves some praise for not simply repeating early condemnations of Philippe's life and relationships, all-too-often she seems to be very uncomfortable dealing with sexual matters. The authors makes broad statements, generalizations, and attempts at psychological explanations that veer into psychobabble. This passage, in the final chapter, is somewhat indicative:

"Monsieur and Madame could never recapture the closeness of the early years of their life together as man and wife. The decompensation [?] of Philippe's personality was complete, leading to his retreat into self-destructive tendencies and into the more abject forms of homosexual behavior. In turn, the increasing bitterness of Liselotte and the rejection of her femininity (probably a sublimated lesbianism) were too pronounced for marital reconciliation in any true sense of the word to be possible."

There are no notes, no annotation, for that passage. Nor does Barker provide any first hand primary source evidence for actual same-sex sexual activity on Philippe's part in the last two decades of his life. I am homosexual, and a historian, and yet I really don't know what she
means by "self-destructive tendencies . . . and the more abject forms of homosexual behavior."

An example of a more successful approach to an early modern individual of same-sex sexual orientation is "King James and the History of Homosexuality" by Michael B. Young, recently revised and republished by Fonthill Media in 2016. Perhaps it is time for a similar re-examination of Philippe's sexuality - and the way it was viewed by his contemporaries.

[Becs · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is the only biography (in English) that I could find dedicated to Philippe I, Duke of Orlean. While I believe him to be an important figure in the life of Louis XIV, indirectly rather than directly, he is not always fully acknowledged. This biography is very comprehensive, giving both sides of how Philippe was perceived from many different sources. It provides direct source quotation (translated into English) which I really liked as well. Overall it gives a very complete picture of him and the impact of his life.

However there is one area of the book that I didn't really appreciate. This was the use of psychology, particularly Freudian psychology which is outdated, in an attempt to understand the personality and motives of these historical characters. While some of the conclusions drawn could be true, many alternative explanations could also be true but were not explored. For example, perhaps the reason he engaged in homosexual relationships was because he enjoyed or preferred them, rather than as a source of self depreciation as the author suggested. An element of trying to understand motives is present in other historical biographies that I have read but it is not so direct. I can see what the author is trying to do but conclusions can not be taken as fact. These people are no longer around to directly observe . Analysis of second hand historical sources are not enough.

[Jean · Rating 4 out of 5]

While obviously dated, this is one of the few biographies about the Philippe I found that is in English. I would like to see an updated version, especially since this was written in the late 1980s. Where is his legacy in 2018 France? I found her historical narrative to be pretty straightforward and easy to follow. I liked the way she organized his life. Like others have said, she did try to psychoanalyze Philippe, more than the usual historian posturings. I tended to skim over those parts and not take them to heart. It was kind of interesting to see how Freud would rationalize his behavior, even if it seemed a bit ridiculous to a modern mind.

I initially got interested in Philippe after watching the Canadian TV series, Versailles. He was the most interesting character that stood out to me in that show. I wanted to learn more about the cross-dressing soldier, that was constantly in battle with his brother. I might have to read a biography about Louis to put some things in perspective, but over all Barker did do a good job of assuming I wasn't Francophile and knew everything about his brother and his reign.

[Gabrielle · Rating 4 out of 5]

Too bad that she discusses homosexuality as if it were a disease. This was published in 1989, so you'd think she would have known better. Other than that, though, the book is the only dedicated biography of Phillipe, full of juicy info about him and his family, and despite her issues with homosexuality, she does a pretty good job of conveying a sense of Phillipe as a person.

[Davina · Rating 4 out of 5]

After watch Versailles I really wanted to find out more about Philippe and being one of the only English works about him I decided to read it. It’s really well written but it’s quite homophobia in places. It’s also very financial heavy and can get boring in places. Otherwise loved the book

[monsieur · Rating 3 out of 5]

I am torn about this book. Though well-written and well-researched, as well as exhaustively cited, it is almost spoiled by the era in which it was written and the subjectivity of its author. Published in 1989, the book is at times extremely homophobic, whether actively asserting harmful interpretations of homosexuality or otherwise passively dismissing its central figure’s sexuality. That means a huge portion of Monsieur’s life — one that positions him as especially compelling considering his time and place in history — goes unexplored. Though Barker acknowledges Monsieur’s preference for men, she frames his queer identity as self-destructive and humiliating. His relationships with male partners are glossed over or downplayed, even when they lasted 30+ years, as in the case of the Chevalier de Lorraine. Barker lauded heterosexual family dynamics and upheld military prowess as the pinnacles of masculinity, stating several times that those were the things that brought Monsieur the most satisfaction. But with so many footnotes, where’s the evidence of that?

There was also a Freudian bent to the book that was honestly ridiculous. I understand that that was big in psychology at the time, but it’s tough to read in 2020. Barker drew confusing conclusions as though they were facts (Monsieur’s second wife Liselotte was a repressed lesbian just because she wasn’t especially feminine; Louis XIV was to blame for Monsieur’s homosexuality for making him feel lesser than as a child) based on a Freudian school of thought that simply doesn’t stand the test of time.

There was also a very 1980s obsession with finance throughout that may have been necessary to understand Monsieur, but was nevertheless a yawn. I really wish there was an updated exploration of Monsieur, preferably from a queer historian, because (while thorough) this book was lacking.

Tl;dr, 2020 sensibilities make this a frustrating read, though it’s fairly comprehensive.

[Sarah · Rating 5 out of 5]

First off let me say that I wasn't too bothered by the extensive psychoanalysis of Philippe and his contemporaries. At some points it was a bit excessive, but overall I think it did help explain his later behaviour. I'm not usually a fan of psychoanalysis, but in this case it works.
Secondly, I was slightly disappointed in the lack of emphasis on Philippe's relationship with the Chevalier (and I don't fully agree with the author's assertions that the Chevalier manipulated Philippe and essentially used him for the benefits that came from being the favourite of the royal brother - but perhaps I'm a romantic), and I really longed to learn more of their interactions with one another, and especially wanted to know how the Chevalier reacted to Philippe's death. Unfortunately this book left me wanting, but perhaps that is due to lack of clear evidence.

This being said, I did love this book. It wasn't dull or heavy as history books can so easily be, and it made me really feel for Philippe who has managed to get a bad rep off of other writers. Overall a very enlightening read!

[Denise · Rating 4 out of 5]

A comprehensive, unbiased portrait of a man too often dismissed as nothing more than a ridiculous figure who never achieved anything of worth. Forever forced to remain far in the shadow of his brother Louis XIV, Philippe nevertheless proved his prowess as a soldier, laid the groundstone for the immense fortune of his house of Orleans and founded a dynasty including kings and emperors of Spain, Austria and Italy as well as France itself. I also appreciated the portrayal of Minette as an actual human being with plenty of faults rather then the saintly figure fiction tends to elevate her to in opposition to her worthless husband. Things get a little iffy (if not downright cringeworthy on occasion) to the present-day reader whenever the author starts trying to psychoanalyze Philippe's sexual orientation, but considering that the book was published in the 80s that wasn't entirely unexpected.

[Dan R. Celhay · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well, many who have read this book complain about how freudian the analysis is, but I think the author it is more punishing about Monsieur not being able to accomplish anything further after the Battle of Cassel. "this book originally was going to be called 'History of an Underdog'"

[Aris Kontyen · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was a great and very educational read :) I really enjoyed it and wish there were more books written about this odd man