What do you think?
Rate this book
Marie-Thérèse, Child of Terror: The Fate of Marie Antoinette's Daughter
The first major biography of one of France's most mysterious women―Marie Antoinette's only child to survive the revolution.
Susan Nagel, author of the critically acclaimed biography Mistress of the Elgin Marbles , turns her attention to the life of a remarkable woman who both defined and shaped an era, the tumultuous last days of the crumbling ancien régime . Nagel brings the formidable Marie-Thérèse to life, along with the age of revolution and the waning days of the aristocracy, in a page-turning biography that will appeal to fans of Antonia Fraser's Marie Antoinette and Amanda Foreman's Duchess of Devonshire .
In December 1795, at midnight on her seventeenth birthday, Marie-Thérèse, the only surviving child of Marie Antoinette and Louis XVI, escaped from Paris's notorious Temple Prison. To this day many believe that the real Marie-Thérèse, traumatized following her family's brutal execution during the Reign of Terror, switched identities with an illegitimate half sister who was often mistaken for her twin. Was the real Marie-Thérèse spirited away to a remote castle to live her life as the woman called "the Dark Countess," while an imposter played her role on the political stage of Europe? Now, two hundred years later, using handwriting samples, DNA testing, and an undiscovered cache of Bourbon family letters, Nagel finally solves this mystery. She tells the remarkable story in full and draws a vivid portrait of an astonishing woman who both defined and shaped an era. Marie-Thérèse's deliberate choice of husbands determined the map of nineteenth-century Europe. Even Napoleon was in awe and called her "the only man in the family." Nagel's gripping narrative captures the events of her fascinating life from her very public birth in front of the rowdy crowds and her precocious childhood to her hideous time in prison and her later reincarnation in the public eye as a saint, and, above all, her fierce loyalty to France throughout.
Susan Nagel, author of the critically acclaimed biography Mistress of the Elgin Marbles , turns her attention to the life of a remarkable woman who both defined and shaped an era, the tumultuous last days of the crumbling ancien régime . Nagel brings the formidable Marie-Thérèse to life, along with the age of revolution and the waning days of the aristocracy, in a page-turning biography that will appeal to fans of Antonia Fraser's Marie Antoinette and Amanda Foreman's Duchess of Devonshire .
In December 1795, at midnight on her seventeenth birthday, Marie-Thérèse, the only surviving child of Marie Antoinette and Louis XVI, escaped from Paris's notorious Temple Prison. To this day many believe that the real Marie-Thérèse, traumatized following her family's brutal execution during the Reign of Terror, switched identities with an illegitimate half sister who was often mistaken for her twin. Was the real Marie-Thérèse spirited away to a remote castle to live her life as the woman called "the Dark Countess," while an imposter played her role on the political stage of Europe? Now, two hundred years later, using handwriting samples, DNA testing, and an undiscovered cache of Bourbon family letters, Nagel finally solves this mystery. She tells the remarkable story in full and draws a vivid portrait of an astonishing woman who both defined and shaped an era. Marie-Thérèse's deliberate choice of husbands determined the map of nineteenth-century Europe. Even Napoleon was in awe and called her "the only man in the family." Nagel's gripping narrative captures the events of her fascinating life from her very public birth in front of the rowdy crowds and her precocious childhood to her hideous time in prison and her later reincarnation in the public eye as a saint, and, above all, her fierce loyalty to France throughout.
418 pages, Hardcover
First published May 12, 2006
128 people are currently reading
6553 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 198 reviews
September 2, 2012
An interesting subject, but the book suffers mightily from the author's inability to express anything but the highest praise for Marie-Therese. She is always intelligent, kind, thoughtful, generous, charitable, etc., never sets a foot wrong, never makes a bad choice -- which makes her, in the end, rather impossible to like. At the same time, the massive events through which Marie-Therese lived are treated so superficially, and so much through a lens of what would or would not benefit or please Marie-Therese, that it is impossible to take any of it seriously. Nagel makes 90% the political crises of the Revolution and Restoration the fault of the greedy, grabbing Orleans family -- Marie-Therese blamed them, so why should we have a wider perspective? She mentions in passing that Count Fersen was in love with Marie Antoinette, but doesn't let the reader know that Fersen was at least plausibly her lover, and certainly a favorite of long standing. An omission like that, along with a strong implication that there would have been plenty to eat in Paris in 1789 if only the revolutionaries hadn't hoarded grain to goad the populace into fury just makes me think Nagel is hopelessly blinkered by her sympathies.
May 27, 2020
http://www.bookwormblues.net/2020/05/...
I’ve read a lot of biographies in my day, but I don’t think any of them have moved me to actual tears the way this one did.
When I read history, I’m often more interested in what happens after, or what happens before the Big Event. It’s interesting to me. World War II is a fascinating, horrible conflict, but I’m less interested in the actual war, and more interested in what happened that allowed a war like that to even be a possibility in the first place, if that makes sense, and I’m interested in how Europe picked up the pieces right after. This book is sort of like that. The French Revolution, as told through the eyes of someone who lived through the meat of it, and survived long after.
This isn’t going to be one of my typical reviews, because I just can’t get this book out of my head.
Marie-Therese was the eldest child of Marie-Antoinette and her husband, Louis XVI. She was born into a life of luxury in the infamous Versailles Palace. She learned at an early age how to perform in public, and keep her royal mask on until she was in private and could truly be herself. In some ways, I think this made her a rather divided person, and that shows up again and again in this book, with her obvious discomfort in situations, but powering through them anyway.
When she was ten, the French Revolution really got going, and she and her family were moved out of Versailles forcefully (literally, lots of blood and guts, lots of things happening that were absolutely traumatizing to the children who witnessed them). They were moved into Paris, where the lived in an old, moldy palace surrounded by guards whose job was to watch them and report on everything that was said. Occasionally the family would be marched out for public events, or for trials where they would stand before a room full of people and have abuses heaped upon them. As a child, she’d have to stand there and stoically watch while her mother and father were dehumanized by a mob of angry French men and women.
At ten, you can imagine how traumatic this must have been.
Anyway, things happened. There was a failed escape attempt, and that was really when stuff went from bad to worse. This was when they were moved into a prison, when her father was beheaded, and the family was separated. And while I knew the outline of all these events, it was quite another thing to learn about it from the writings of a woman coming of age in the middle of all of this. And you know, I was fine… FINE… until I realized that the government forbid anyone from telling Marie-Therese that her mother was dead, and until I read about the absolutely horrible, awful conditions her brother lived in (that poor boy was abused in ways that nearly gave me nightmares), and how she was likewise unaware of his tragic, awful death despite the fact that he was kept in the room right below her.
So, she spends about seven years of her life in lockdown, living in one prison or another. As a teenager, she refused to talk for over a year. At one point, when she was nearing the age of seventeen, the government started to negotiate a trade (Marie-Therese for twenty hostages) with Austria, they sent someone to Marie-Therese to get her used to talking again, and using her voice. This woman, who became like a family to this isolated teenager, couldn’t take holding the secret of her mother and brother’s deaths anymore, so after years in the case of Marie-Antoinette, and months for her ten-year-old brother, she finally learned that she was the last person in her immediate family alive, and it nearly broke her, I’m guessing.
(Despite rumors that her brother had escaped, these are all unfounded.)
Then she leaves, and instead of getting time to adjust to life again, she has to navigate these treacherous waters of marriage, because whoever she marries matters. She throws her lot in with the monarchists, and France, and her life continues on… but on a personal level, going from being in one prison or another for seven years, to “hey, marry this guy” must have given her whiplash, the likes of which I cannot begin to fathom.
I know I’m going on a bit of a tangent here, and I’ll attempt to stop being so plot-spoilery here, but her life really, really floored me. We know about her parents losing their heads. We know about Marie-Antoinette and all her hair, but not much is known about Marie-Therese, and how she had to navigate these political waters, despite very obviously having some real, unaddressed PTSD, and emotional trauma from what she’d suffered through. She still pulled herself together and was a woman around whom events turned. It is unfortunate that her name isn’t spoken in wider circles even today.
The only real crime these children committed was the sin of being born, and her little brother suffered unimaginable abuses and died of starvation and (insert disease here… you can really just pick one and the poor boy had it) because of it, and Marie-Therese, I daresay, likely never had a “normal” life or psyche due to it.
I can’t imagine her life. I really can’t. I had to periodically stop reading this book so I could just absorb what I was taking in. And the thing is, this is a biography, but it reads more like a novel. If I didn’t know it was real, I wouldn’t believe it.
In her own way, Marie-Therese’s childhood, pre-French Revolution really was the bedrock upon which she built the house of her soul. She knew how to navigate these treacherous political waters, and despite always struggling with the memories of what happened, she remained doggedly loyal to her country and the people who live in it for all her days, even through her numerous stints in exile. She never had children, though she had very close friends and family, whom she considered her own. She was a person people went to for advice, and she was highly regarded and admired, even becoming somewhat of a pop-culture icon in her day.
Nagel wrote an absolutely amazing biography here. It honestly is probably one of the best biographies I’ve ever read, and I do think it’s rather criminal that more people haven’t read it. She’s managed to take someone that has maybe faded a bit in the historical tapestry, and breathed stunning life into them. Under Nagel’s deft hand, Marie-Therese was not just a person I read about, but hers was a story I felt like I was living. It gave me a new perspective of the French Revolution, and a new understanding of a heroic woman who somehow, despite all odds, survived a situation that I think would have broken most people.
If you’ve got any interest in the French Revolution, I think this book needs to be essential reading.
I’ve read a lot of biographies in my day, but I don’t think any of them have moved me to actual tears the way this one did.
When I read history, I’m often more interested in what happens after, or what happens before the Big Event. It’s interesting to me. World War II is a fascinating, horrible conflict, but I’m less interested in the actual war, and more interested in what happened that allowed a war like that to even be a possibility in the first place, if that makes sense, and I’m interested in how Europe picked up the pieces right after. This book is sort of like that. The French Revolution, as told through the eyes of someone who lived through the meat of it, and survived long after.
This isn’t going to be one of my typical reviews, because I just can’t get this book out of my head.
Marie-Therese was the eldest child of Marie-Antoinette and her husband, Louis XVI. She was born into a life of luxury in the infamous Versailles Palace. She learned at an early age how to perform in public, and keep her royal mask on until she was in private and could truly be herself. In some ways, I think this made her a rather divided person, and that shows up again and again in this book, with her obvious discomfort in situations, but powering through them anyway.
When she was ten, the French Revolution really got going, and she and her family were moved out of Versailles forcefully (literally, lots of blood and guts, lots of things happening that were absolutely traumatizing to the children who witnessed them). They were moved into Paris, where the lived in an old, moldy palace surrounded by guards whose job was to watch them and report on everything that was said. Occasionally the family would be marched out for public events, or for trials where they would stand before a room full of people and have abuses heaped upon them. As a child, she’d have to stand there and stoically watch while her mother and father were dehumanized by a mob of angry French men and women.
At ten, you can imagine how traumatic this must have been.
Anyway, things happened. There was a failed escape attempt, and that was really when stuff went from bad to worse. This was when they were moved into a prison, when her father was beheaded, and the family was separated. And while I knew the outline of all these events, it was quite another thing to learn about it from the writings of a woman coming of age in the middle of all of this. And you know, I was fine… FINE… until I realized that the government forbid anyone from telling Marie-Therese that her mother was dead, and until I read about the absolutely horrible, awful conditions her brother lived in (that poor boy was abused in ways that nearly gave me nightmares), and how she was likewise unaware of his tragic, awful death despite the fact that he was kept in the room right below her.
So, she spends about seven years of her life in lockdown, living in one prison or another. As a teenager, she refused to talk for over a year. At one point, when she was nearing the age of seventeen, the government started to negotiate a trade (Marie-Therese for twenty hostages) with Austria, they sent someone to Marie-Therese to get her used to talking again, and using her voice. This woman, who became like a family to this isolated teenager, couldn’t take holding the secret of her mother and brother’s deaths anymore, so after years in the case of Marie-Antoinette, and months for her ten-year-old brother, she finally learned that she was the last person in her immediate family alive, and it nearly broke her, I’m guessing.
(Despite rumors that her brother had escaped, these are all unfounded.)
Then she leaves, and instead of getting time to adjust to life again, she has to navigate these treacherous waters of marriage, because whoever she marries matters. She throws her lot in with the monarchists, and France, and her life continues on… but on a personal level, going from being in one prison or another for seven years, to “hey, marry this guy” must have given her whiplash, the likes of which I cannot begin to fathom.
I know I’m going on a bit of a tangent here, and I’ll attempt to stop being so plot-spoilery here, but her life really, really floored me. We know about her parents losing their heads. We know about Marie-Antoinette and all her hair, but not much is known about Marie-Therese, and how she had to navigate these political waters, despite very obviously having some real, unaddressed PTSD, and emotional trauma from what she’d suffered through. She still pulled herself together and was a woman around whom events turned. It is unfortunate that her name isn’t spoken in wider circles even today.
The only real crime these children committed was the sin of being born, and her little brother suffered unimaginable abuses and died of starvation and (insert disease here… you can really just pick one and the poor boy had it) because of it, and Marie-Therese, I daresay, likely never had a “normal” life or psyche due to it.
I can’t imagine her life. I really can’t. I had to periodically stop reading this book so I could just absorb what I was taking in. And the thing is, this is a biography, but it reads more like a novel. If I didn’t know it was real, I wouldn’t believe it.
In her own way, Marie-Therese’s childhood, pre-French Revolution really was the bedrock upon which she built the house of her soul. She knew how to navigate these treacherous political waters, and despite always struggling with the memories of what happened, she remained doggedly loyal to her country and the people who live in it for all her days, even through her numerous stints in exile. She never had children, though she had very close friends and family, whom she considered her own. She was a person people went to for advice, and she was highly regarded and admired, even becoming somewhat of a pop-culture icon in her day.
Nagel wrote an absolutely amazing biography here. It honestly is probably one of the best biographies I’ve ever read, and I do think it’s rather criminal that more people haven’t read it. She’s managed to take someone that has maybe faded a bit in the historical tapestry, and breathed stunning life into them. Under Nagel’s deft hand, Marie-Therese was not just a person I read about, but hers was a story I felt like I was living. It gave me a new perspective of the French Revolution, and a new understanding of a heroic woman who somehow, despite all odds, survived a situation that I think would have broken most people.
If you’ve got any interest in the French Revolution, I think this book needs to be essential reading.
October 8, 2018
Audiobook #169
July 14, 2010
After reading many biographies on Marie Antoinette, I knew she had four children - two died as children, one - Louis XVII - at the Temple Prison in Paris, and the eldest, Marie-Thérèse, survived. But Madame Royale, as Marie-Thérèse was known as eldest daughter of the King, not only survived but went on to live a long and eventful life.
Born after years of a childless marriage between Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette, Marie-Thérèse (named after her grandmother, Austrian Empress Maria Theresa) had a lavish childhood at Versailles. She had loving parents and siblings she adored. But her world came tumbling down with the French Revolution. I very much enjoyed Nagel's portrait of the Revolution - never forgetting Marie-Thérèse's point of view while in their house arrest in the Tuileries or during their ill-fated escape to Varennes. The chapters describing their life at the Temple Prison are heartbreaking, descriptions of the lonely teenager, locked into a disgusting cell, having already lost her father, not knowing her mother and beloved aunt Madame Elisabeth had been guillotined and often hearing her little brother being tortured. And yet is hard to pity Marie-Thérèse: she comes accross as an incredibly strong and confident young woman, and it's easy to see how she would always survive.
Once the Directory comes into power Marie-Thérèse's life changes, she manages to escape to her mother's birthplace of Austria and her new life finally begins. As a pawn in the European marriage market she stays in Vienna until her marriage to her first cousin, the Duc D'Angoulême, son of the future Charles X. Alongside her uncle Louis XVIII, Marie-Thérèse would become a powerful woman, going through her many grievances in life with extreme dignity and her head always held high. Marie-Thérèse believed in her duty to the King and France over anything, and her piety and capacity for forgiveness were remarkable. She does truly come to life through Nagel's words, and I really could not stop reading about her story.
My only problems with the book were - the lack of notes, but the research is so incredible I can overlook it; and how little the relationship between Duc and Duchesse D'Angoulême was analyzed. But overall, the book was fantastic, and I'm glad to know more about Marie-Thérèse's life. Napoleon called her "the only man" in her family - and he was not mistaken.
Born after years of a childless marriage between Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette, Marie-Thérèse (named after her grandmother, Austrian Empress Maria Theresa) had a lavish childhood at Versailles. She had loving parents and siblings she adored. But her world came tumbling down with the French Revolution. I very much enjoyed Nagel's portrait of the Revolution - never forgetting Marie-Thérèse's point of view while in their house arrest in the Tuileries or during their ill-fated escape to Varennes. The chapters describing their life at the Temple Prison are heartbreaking, descriptions of the lonely teenager, locked into a disgusting cell, having already lost her father, not knowing her mother and beloved aunt Madame Elisabeth had been guillotined and often hearing her little brother being tortured. And yet is hard to pity Marie-Thérèse: she comes accross as an incredibly strong and confident young woman, and it's easy to see how she would always survive.
Once the Directory comes into power Marie-Thérèse's life changes, she manages to escape to her mother's birthplace of Austria and her new life finally begins. As a pawn in the European marriage market she stays in Vienna until her marriage to her first cousin, the Duc D'Angoulême, son of the future Charles X. Alongside her uncle Louis XVIII, Marie-Thérèse would become a powerful woman, going through her many grievances in life with extreme dignity and her head always held high. Marie-Thérèse believed in her duty to the King and France over anything, and her piety and capacity for forgiveness were remarkable. She does truly come to life through Nagel's words, and I really could not stop reading about her story.
My only problems with the book were - the lack of notes, but the research is so incredible I can overlook it; and how little the relationship between Duc and Duchesse D'Angoulême was analyzed. But overall, the book was fantastic, and I'm glad to know more about Marie-Thérèse's life. Napoleon called her "the only man" in her family - and he was not mistaken.
May 31, 2011
This is practically a hagiography of the royal family. It is a shame because her obvious tendency to adoration makes her portrayal--sometimes, I'm sure, unfairly--seem less believable. It is an interesting story about someone I knew nothing about. I realize that Nagel might simply be attempting to counter narratives biased in the other way of the "let them eat cake" sort. But the constant references, for instance, to members of the royal family "charming" people made this reader think that perhaps it was a case of "the lady doth protest too much." Perhaps they really were all charming people. But we'd know that only through accounts from people of the time and it would have been better and more believable to let their words portray the royals without the intercession of the author's interpretations.
August 8, 2012
I don't think I've ever given a thought to whatever happened to Marie-Antoinette's daughter but am I glad I got my hands on this book and read it because Marie-Therese, Madame Royale Of France, was a fascinating woman. Versailles was her childhood home; opulence, deference, divine right and Privilege with a P were hers from birth. But Marie-Antoinette and her husband also instilled a deep and abiding religious faith as well as a serious case of Noblesse Oblige in the little girl that served her well in enduring the terrors committed against her family. Imprisoned for three years during her adolescence she didn't learn that her mother had been guillotined or her little brother slowly starved, beaten and neglected to death until some time after the fact. She remained silent for over a year rather than communicate with her very cruel captors. The young girl had a grave dignity that could not be broken. She finally emerged from prison to deal with the difficult and dangerous politics of her extended family where her cool head and firmly entrenched sense of duty to France afforded her a life of intrigue, power and tremendous respect amongst the royalty of late 18th century & early 19th century Europe. She was as much of a mover and shaker as a woman could be during these complicated and quickly evolving times. She denied herself a great deal of happiness by devoting her every move towards what she truly believed was in the best interests of the Bourbon family and the kingdom she knew was theirs by divine right, her beloved home, France, which she always left only under duress. Her greatest pain was being exiled from the country of her birth, away from the French people whom she always forgave and dearly loved.
Nagel writes a lovely biography, bringing Marie-Therese very much to life. Well researched, beautifully paced, I sped through this book with joy. Really good stuff here.
Nagel writes a lovely biography, bringing Marie-Therese very much to life. Well researched, beautifully paced, I sped through this book with joy. Really good stuff here.
January 5, 2025
A fantastic story. The daughter of Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette. So much suffering and pain, the executions of her father , mother and much beloved aunt. The death of her younger brother Louis XVII. The death of 2 uncles. She had to leave France and was always in fear. She never had any children but loved her niece and nephew if her husband as her own. She suffered many imposters claiming to be her brother and some claiming to be her. Each time she suffered through the agony of the loss. A much beloved princess and then queen wife of Louis XIX living in exile most of her life.
June 5, 2015
This book... I don't even know how to grade this book. I feel like it's more like 2 1/2 stars, but since it's not TWO stars I rounded up instead. The problem is that while this book is very nicely paced and interesting, it's hard to trust it's accuracy. In fact, it lost any believe-ability in my mind from pretty much the beginning, when the author tried to claim that Louis VXI had an affair with a woman on staff to prove his fertility and fathered a child with her, and then later had an affair with Yolande, Duchesse de Polignac, and fathered a son with her as well. Yes, Louis XVI, the one who took 7 years to consummate his marriage with Marie Antoinette, and was pretty much the first King in multiple generations to not have any official mistresses. I don't know what was more laughable, the idea that he'd just randomly have sex with a woman to prove he was fertile, or that he'd have an affair and a mistress but keep it quiet in a society that literally expected him to have a public, official mistress, and was in fact constantly pushing him to have one.
ANYWAY from that point on the credibility of the book was lost, so I found myself always wondering just what was and wasn't true, when it came to parts I had no background on. The revolution, for example, did not seem to be understood by the author. Much of the book seemed very very biased towards Marie-Therese, which is understandable on some level but was rather over the top in this book. I also felt like the author's lack of citations on so many things only added to my inability to decide whether it was accurate or not. I got so used to reading biographies that constantly mentioned where the sources of information were that this was a bit jarring.
Still it was a very riveting story and, if this is accurate in any way, Maria-Therese still did lead a fascinating life and was a very strong woman. It was an interesting read, regardless of my doubts.
ANYWAY from that point on the credibility of the book was lost, so I found myself always wondering just what was and wasn't true, when it came to parts I had no background on. The revolution, for example, did not seem to be understood by the author. Much of the book seemed very very biased towards Marie-Therese, which is understandable on some level but was rather over the top in this book. I also felt like the author's lack of citations on so many things only added to my inability to decide whether it was accurate or not. I got so used to reading biographies that constantly mentioned where the sources of information were that this was a bit jarring.
Still it was a very riveting story and, if this is accurate in any way, Maria-Therese still did lead a fascinating life and was a very strong woman. It was an interesting read, regardless of my doubts.
March 3, 2013
A lot of interesting detail about the French Revolution and the aftermath that I had never heard before - so that kept me reading, but I had 2 big issues with this book:
1. It's written as though the French royalty were saints as if everything everyone besides Marie Antoinette, Louis the 16th, and Marie Therese did was right and the rest were wrong...Even the adjectives she uses for everyone else are negative - even though I'm not sure she really has enough historical info to describe some of these people. Yes, what happened to them was gruesome and cruel and the French Revolution was extremely bloody and violent. But the royalty weren't blameless in everything that happened. For instance, one of the reasons the family did not escape before they were guillotined was that Marie Antoinette went on a shopping spree - buying a whole new set of clothes and all sorts of perfumes,etc - that tipped off the revolutionaries that they were trying to flee. She keeps trying to endear us to the royal family by saying things like "the revolutionaries didn't even let them change their clothes for a whole day." Not sure that makes me feel so bad for them compared to the common French citizen who didn't have enough to eat.
2. The description of the book talks about the theory of the Dark Countess and a potential switch after Marie Therese escaped the prison with her half sister. However, that's barely touched on in the book and most of the discussion of this is left to an "Afterword" almost like the author forgot to address it until then. So if you are really interested in that story, this isn't the book for you.
It's still worth a read if you are interested in the history post-revolution of the French royalty and Europe in general in the 1800s. Would have never learned that there are a bunch of people who are direct descendants of the King who still claim the French throne today in Europe!
1. It's written as though the French royalty were saints as if everything everyone besides Marie Antoinette, Louis the 16th, and Marie Therese did was right and the rest were wrong...Even the adjectives she uses for everyone else are negative - even though I'm not sure she really has enough historical info to describe some of these people. Yes, what happened to them was gruesome and cruel and the French Revolution was extremely bloody and violent. But the royalty weren't blameless in everything that happened. For instance, one of the reasons the family did not escape before they were guillotined was that Marie Antoinette went on a shopping spree - buying a whole new set of clothes and all sorts of perfumes,etc - that tipped off the revolutionaries that they were trying to flee. She keeps trying to endear us to the royal family by saying things like "the revolutionaries didn't even let them change their clothes for a whole day." Not sure that makes me feel so bad for them compared to the common French citizen who didn't have enough to eat.
2. The description of the book talks about the theory of the Dark Countess and a potential switch after Marie Therese escaped the prison with her half sister. However, that's barely touched on in the book and most of the discussion of this is left to an "Afterword" almost like the author forgot to address it until then. So if you are really interested in that story, this isn't the book for you.
It's still worth a read if you are interested in the history post-revolution of the French royalty and Europe in general in the 1800s. Would have never learned that there are a bunch of people who are direct descendants of the King who still claim the French throne today in Europe!
March 11, 2010
This excellent biography of the only surviving child of Marie Antoinette and Louis XVI gives an outstanding, scholarly but easily-read depiction of the events and atmosphere leading up to her birth and throughout her more than seven decades of life. I was especiallh impressed by the ease with which rumors could be spread in the mostly-illiterate population, by the role of Louis XVI's cousin Louis-Philippe in propagating rumors in the hope of his own succession and Louis-Philippe's disingenousness. He could be a modern sleazy politician. Courts tended to have lots of attendants, they were, in essence, jobs programs. In exile, royals were surrounded by emigres who wanted jobs. The lot of royal females was miserable under Salic law (which demanded male succession, thus making females only useful for marriage bartering, in the usually-vain hope of gaining the friendship of another country.)
October 30, 2018
I am so conflicted by this book. It is excellent and incredibly well-researched, but for me, I really struggled in picking it up and reading it. I found the first half extremely cumbersome, as people would be introduced and dispatched within paragraphs. While they were all historically relevant, it kept drawing me out of the central story concerning Marie-Thérèse and made this book easy to put down, and hard to pick back up.
But the action did pick up towards the end and I did find myself enjoying the book and appreciating the information I was learning, most of which was new to me. I am happy I persevered but I didn't really like this author's writing style. So 3 stars for this one.
But the action did pick up towards the end and I did find myself enjoying the book and appreciating the information I was learning, most of which was new to me. I am happy I persevered but I didn't really like this author's writing style. So 3 stars for this one.
June 11, 2008
I got this because it promised to reveal the true story of the "Dark Countess". I had no idea who she was, but she sounded like someone I wanted to get to know. She actually doesn't figure much into this book after all, but the story of Marie Antoinette's only surviving child was thrilling enough to hold my interest. And for the record- I think poor Marie got the shaft from history. I'm going to have to get a book on her next.
October 5, 2025
It is not often that I shelve a biography/history in all five of my 'bad' categories but this truly dreadful biography deserves even greater excoriating because of the author's attempts to pass herself as an academic thus claiming, indeed demanding, serious attention. She isn't academic (there is nothing wrong with being outside of academia) and her skill set is clearly that of a publicist - which is in fact what she began her working life as.
The book is awful in so many ways - the idea that Louis XVI who was famously the first French in generations or may be even ever - had two illegitimate children is not so much absurd as jaw dropping stupid. That Robespierre had a collection of Marie Antoinette's belongings secreted in his sock drawer as some fetish is tale no historian credits and originated amongst the scurrilous tales told post the restoration. When the facts don't fit the image Ms. Nagel wants to convey she ignores them, thus she frequently refers to Marie-Therese 'fleeing' or 'escaping' the Temple prison rather than leaving it as part of prisoner exchange organised by the Directory and Holy Roman Emperor (not the 'Austrian' emperor or empire because 1795 there was no such person or empire and there wouldn't be until 1804 when the Holy Roman Emperor Francis II proclaimed himself emperor of such. Thus Marie Theresa, Marie Antoinette's mother was never 'Austrian' empress. If there were not so many other errors and absurdities I would be willing to believe Ms. Nagel was simply simplifying things - but I don't think she knows and even worse she doesn't care).
But aside from picking through the author's idiotic mistakes what rankles is that her obtuseness, most likely her ignorance, means that she doesn't see what it really interesting - such as how the way Francis II attempted to pressure Marie-Therese into becoming a 'Habsburg' rather than Bourbon exactly parallels what was done to turn Napoleon's son from King of Rome, heir to an empire and a French speaking prince into the German speaking Franz Duke of Reichstadt.
She also fails to elucidate the many complex threads that surrounded Marie-Theresa's marriage. Her uncle, the self proclaimed Louis XVIII, wanted to be in charge because that would demonstrate that he was the genuine head of a functioning royal family. It was much better to marry her to his nephew (he had no children) because that would conceal his lack of the finances to dower a 'Daughter of France' properly, or at all. Nagel also fails to examine how rarely French Princesses married - only one of Louis XV eight daughters married and Louis XVI only sister never married. Indeed French princesses were something of poisoned chalice as the case of Marguerite Louise d'Orléans to the penultimate Grand Duke of Tuscany proved.
One of the worst aspects of the biography is the author's ridiculously over-the-top bias towards her subject and all royals. That Marie-Therese returned to France after the deposition of Napoleon to a city ready to sentimentally embrace the daughter of the 'martyred' king and queen but, as even commentators at the time noted, she was such a cold stuck-up bitch that she quickly killed any warmth that might have existed and helped ensure that restoration was always going to be temporary. That she and her husband embraced the most reactionary stand-point and did everything possible to undermine Louis XVIII limited attempts at reconciliation is simply explained away.
That the author devotes so much space in her book to discussing the idea that the Marie-Therese had been replaced by a doppelganger is, considering how the legends of other famous royal survivors like Anastasia and Louis XVII had been demolished, not only a waste of time but simply an opportunity for her to talk about he hobnobbing with various decayed Euro-trash like prince Lobkowicz (whose archives she boasts of consulting but from which she quotes nor references a single document.
The pity is that someone with intelligence has not turned their attention to the life of Marie-Therese because there is a fascinating strand in feminist historiography that is turning up much that is of interest in the lives of minor female royals in the 18th and 19th centuries - such as 'Queenship in Europe 1660-1815' by Clarissa Campbell Orr.
Interestingly a quick glance at GR reviews for Ms. Nagel's other books reveals that her partisanship, poor scholarship and overall awfulness is amply evident in them.
The book is awful in so many ways - the idea that Louis XVI who was famously the first French in generations or may be even ever - had two illegitimate children is not so much absurd as jaw dropping stupid. That Robespierre had a collection of Marie Antoinette's belongings secreted in his sock drawer as some fetish is tale no historian credits and originated amongst the scurrilous tales told post the restoration. When the facts don't fit the image Ms. Nagel wants to convey she ignores them, thus she frequently refers to Marie-Therese 'fleeing' or 'escaping' the Temple prison rather than leaving it as part of prisoner exchange organised by the Directory and Holy Roman Emperor (not the 'Austrian' emperor or empire because 1795 there was no such person or empire and there wouldn't be until 1804 when the Holy Roman Emperor Francis II proclaimed himself emperor of such. Thus Marie Theresa, Marie Antoinette's mother was never 'Austrian' empress. If there were not so many other errors and absurdities I would be willing to believe Ms. Nagel was simply simplifying things - but I don't think she knows and even worse she doesn't care).
But aside from picking through the author's idiotic mistakes what rankles is that her obtuseness, most likely her ignorance, means that she doesn't see what it really interesting - such as how the way Francis II attempted to pressure Marie-Therese into becoming a 'Habsburg' rather than Bourbon exactly parallels what was done to turn Napoleon's son from King of Rome, heir to an empire and a French speaking prince into the German speaking Franz Duke of Reichstadt.
She also fails to elucidate the many complex threads that surrounded Marie-Theresa's marriage. Her uncle, the self proclaimed Louis XVIII, wanted to be in charge because that would demonstrate that he was the genuine head of a functioning royal family. It was much better to marry her to his nephew (he had no children) because that would conceal his lack of the finances to dower a 'Daughter of France' properly, or at all. Nagel also fails to examine how rarely French Princesses married - only one of Louis XV eight daughters married and Louis XVI only sister never married. Indeed French princesses were something of poisoned chalice as the case of Marguerite Louise d'Orléans to the penultimate Grand Duke of Tuscany proved.
One of the worst aspects of the biography is the author's ridiculously over-the-top bias towards her subject and all royals. That Marie-Therese returned to France after the deposition of Napoleon to a city ready to sentimentally embrace the daughter of the 'martyred' king and queen but, as even commentators at the time noted, she was such a cold stuck-up bitch that she quickly killed any warmth that might have existed and helped ensure that restoration was always going to be temporary. That she and her husband embraced the most reactionary stand-point and did everything possible to undermine Louis XVIII limited attempts at reconciliation is simply explained away.
That the author devotes so much space in her book to discussing the idea that the Marie-Therese had been replaced by a doppelganger is, considering how the legends of other famous royal survivors like Anastasia and Louis XVII had been demolished, not only a waste of time but simply an opportunity for her to talk about he hobnobbing with various decayed Euro-trash like prince Lobkowicz (whose archives she boasts of consulting but from which she quotes nor references a single document.
The pity is that someone with intelligence has not turned their attention to the life of Marie-Therese because there is a fascinating strand in feminist historiography that is turning up much that is of interest in the lives of minor female royals in the 18th and 19th centuries - such as 'Queenship in Europe 1660-1815' by Clarissa Campbell Orr.
Interestingly a quick glance at GR reviews for Ms. Nagel's other books reveals that her partisanship, poor scholarship and overall awfulness is amply evident in them.
November 21, 2017
Fascinating account of the life of Marie-Therese. Before reading this, I knew of her existence but nothing more. What a sad life she led. After her gilded start in life, she was imprisoned (which I knew), had to deal with the deaths of her parents and siblings, married out of duty not love, had no children, and spent her life moving around, seeking (and twice seeing) the restoration of Bourbon rule in France. A particularly interesting part of her story was speculation that she wasn't who she said she was (switched places with her supposed illegitimate half-sister?) and the possibility that her brother hadn't really died in the Temple prison.
May 28, 2016
Everyone knows about Marie Antoinette, or at least thinks they do. I was excited to read about her daughter. Unfortunately, in several books I've read lately it seems author's choose a lesser known or unpopular historical figure in order to sneakily write about a more popular one. Until her death in the book it's mostly about Marie Antoinette and her youngest son, and not her daughter. If paragraphs not directly relating to the young girl were omitted it would be a much shorter account. Which is odd because apparently there is a wealth of information about the young princess written by her mother to other family members scattered around Europe.
For example: When the young royals were getting a new governess the queen is said to write a touching overview of the strengths and weaknesses of the children. Here should be insight into the young girl. Nope. There's a lengthy paragraph about her younger brother and then the author moves on. Wait. What? The queen specifically wrote to the new governess asking that she not neglect the princess in favor of the heir, yet the author does that very thing.
I'm just saying, write about who you really are interested in. It's always revealed in the writing anyway. In fact from the narrative I'd think the author a big defender/fan of Marie Antoinette. She sometimes includes as fact whispers of rumors that most historians to acknowledge, while also absolving the queen of any truth to rumors that swirled about her and even persist to our day. While I appreciate that she was treated fairly, I wish the King received the same treatment.
Louis XVI is considered to be the first king in 200 years to not have a royal mistress or favorite. Marie Antoinette was said to be the first queen who thought she could be both wife and mistress of the king of France. Louis grew up having to deal with his grandfather's mistress the Madame du Barry, whom he loathed. He hated everything about that lifestyle by all accounts. He was deeply religious and faithful, yet the book suggests he had not one, but two affairs? I can't find anything that concretely supports that. Obviously none of us were there. There was so much propaganda at the time it's hard to tell the truth. But it seems odd to me.
So here's the thing...Louis was by all accounts faithful to his queen all through the years where they were not conceiving and sexually frustrated. No hints that he strayed. Yet when finally they discover they are not having sex appropriately (poor things), we're to believe now is when he decided to stray? Seems like odd timing. A big deal is made about the fact that there appears to have been a facial similarity to the young princess. But then later the fact that Marie Therese looks so different is seen as proof a switch was made. Okay which is it? They looked like twins when trying to prove they're sisters, look completely different when trying to support another theory. Who can say? Maybe she did look related, but does that mean it was the king's doing? Weren't we told right before this about the kings brothel hopping brother's and cousins living there too? Or somehow could she be a decedent of his mistress loving grandfather? There seems to have been enough philanderers about without having to assume it's the kings child. Yes, the King and Queen did adopt the girl, but really how many queens willingly take in their husbands bastard? Not only that, loves the girl, educates the girl, and keeps her as her daughter's constant companion? That seems unrealistic. And what about the king? He adored his daughter Marie-Therese. He loved being a father and was an excellent one. I can't imagine that a man that broke with tradition and honored his daughter as if she were the heir to the throne wouldn't do the same for even a child born by a mistress, especially in a country and time where to do so wouldn't be scandalous. When the royal family was about to attempt an escape the girl was sent to her real father in the country for safety. I highly doubt the king would have been parted from his biological child in such a way. In fact, the public probably would have LOVED it to see Marie Antoinette humiliated and proven to be the infertile one.
Then there's Gabrielle Yolanda de Polignac. For a man who was devoted to his wife, I really don't think her best friend would be his mistress. In fact, once again I don't find any conclusive evidence, or much evidence at all that suggests they were lovers. In fact there were more rumors she was the queen's lover. So what he wrote to her over the years? He was his wife's best friend, he had encouraged their friendship because she was a calming influence on his wife, and had been his children's governess. Even the book includes a quote that the queen wasn't too worried about it. At the time of the supposed affair it was widely accepted Gabrielle was in love with a captain of the royal guard. Meanwhile the queen was carrying on correspondence with several men. Nobody seemed too worried.
With so much of this review already dominated by other characters of the book you can see how little is actually devoted to the young girl.
As for the switch: I'd think people she'd known her whole life and had unselfishly risked everything for the royal family's benefit would have had something to say about an impostor.
For example: When the young royals were getting a new governess the queen is said to write a touching overview of the strengths and weaknesses of the children. Here should be insight into the young girl. Nope. There's a lengthy paragraph about her younger brother and then the author moves on. Wait. What? The queen specifically wrote to the new governess asking that she not neglect the princess in favor of the heir, yet the author does that very thing.
I'm just saying, write about who you really are interested in. It's always revealed in the writing anyway. In fact from the narrative I'd think the author a big defender/fan of Marie Antoinette. She sometimes includes as fact whispers of rumors that most historians to acknowledge, while also absolving the queen of any truth to rumors that swirled about her and even persist to our day. While I appreciate that she was treated fairly, I wish the King received the same treatment.
Louis XVI is considered to be the first king in 200 years to not have a royal mistress or favorite. Marie Antoinette was said to be the first queen who thought she could be both wife and mistress of the king of France. Louis grew up having to deal with his grandfather's mistress the Madame du Barry, whom he loathed. He hated everything about that lifestyle by all accounts. He was deeply religious and faithful, yet the book suggests he had not one, but two affairs? I can't find anything that concretely supports that. Obviously none of us were there. There was so much propaganda at the time it's hard to tell the truth. But it seems odd to me.
So here's the thing...Louis was by all accounts faithful to his queen all through the years where they were not conceiving and sexually frustrated. No hints that he strayed. Yet when finally they discover they are not having sex appropriately (poor things), we're to believe now is when he decided to stray? Seems like odd timing. A big deal is made about the fact that there appears to have been a facial similarity to the young princess. But then later the fact that Marie Therese looks so different is seen as proof a switch was made. Okay which is it? They looked like twins when trying to prove they're sisters, look completely different when trying to support another theory. Who can say? Maybe she did look related, but does that mean it was the king's doing? Weren't we told right before this about the kings brothel hopping brother's and cousins living there too? Or somehow could she be a decedent of his mistress loving grandfather? There seems to have been enough philanderers about without having to assume it's the kings child. Yes, the King and Queen did adopt the girl, but really how many queens willingly take in their husbands bastard? Not only that, loves the girl, educates the girl, and keeps her as her daughter's constant companion? That seems unrealistic. And what about the king? He adored his daughter Marie-Therese. He loved being a father and was an excellent one. I can't imagine that a man that broke with tradition and honored his daughter as if she were the heir to the throne wouldn't do the same for even a child born by a mistress, especially in a country and time where to do so wouldn't be scandalous. When the royal family was about to attempt an escape the girl was sent to her real father in the country for safety. I highly doubt the king would have been parted from his biological child in such a way. In fact, the public probably would have LOVED it to see Marie Antoinette humiliated and proven to be the infertile one.
Then there's Gabrielle Yolanda de Polignac. For a man who was devoted to his wife, I really don't think her best friend would be his mistress. In fact, once again I don't find any conclusive evidence, or much evidence at all that suggests they were lovers. In fact there were more rumors she was the queen's lover. So what he wrote to her over the years? He was his wife's best friend, he had encouraged their friendship because she was a calming influence on his wife, and had been his children's governess. Even the book includes a quote that the queen wasn't too worried about it. At the time of the supposed affair it was widely accepted Gabrielle was in love with a captain of the royal guard. Meanwhile the queen was carrying on correspondence with several men. Nobody seemed too worried.
With so much of this review already dominated by other characters of the book you can see how little is actually devoted to the young girl.
As for the switch: I'd think people she'd known her whole life and had unselfishly risked everything for the royal family's benefit would have had something to say about an impostor.
June 4, 2010
Given her birth to Marie Antoinette, and the loss of the mother, father and younger brother in the French Revolution, you would expect Marie-Therese's life to be full of interest. Instead it's full of horror in it's French half and of dull priggishness once she is returned to the Germans, who allow her to marry back into the French royal family, a course that even the author seems to see as self-destructive. This is living proof that being born a "royal" does not make one a singular person. The book was no doubt historically correct, but was also without a doubt a crashing bore. I hate to have to say this but I cnnot in all conscience recommend it, except to someone with a minutely particular interest in the French Royal family after the revolution.
July 15, 2020
2016 Rating: 5 stars
2020 Rating: 5 stars
This was absolutely excellent! One of the strongest, and well researched biographies of any person I've read in a long time.
I've read a lot of books, and biographies, about Marie-Antoinette and the French Revolution, and looking back I shutter to realize how seldomly noted her eldest child (her only child to make it to adulthood) is in the historical context of all those collected works.
This is a new all time favorite of mine.
2020 Rating: 5 stars
This was absolutely excellent! One of the strongest, and well researched biographies of any person I've read in a long time.
I've read a lot of books, and biographies, about Marie-Antoinette and the French Revolution, and looking back I shutter to realize how seldomly noted her eldest child (her only child to make it to adulthood) is in the historical context of all those collected works.
This is a new all time favorite of mine.
February 5, 2021
Thorough biography of the only surviving child of Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette, Marie Therese. Exhaustive research (how are some of these details available?!) that is told in a comprehensible way. I thoroughly enjoyed this! The author does display a point of view in favor of France's monarchy.
April 30, 2013
Most important to me in a biography is that the writer lay out the story of the person and the times in an interesting and readable way. For the writer this means finding the right balance between documenting, which can get very dry, and telling, which calls for judgment of what to leave in and out. Susan Nagel has hit a perfect balance. She has sorted through a tremendous number of sources and created what may be the first biography of the only surviving child of Marie Antoinette.
Next in importance to me when I read a biography is feeling, at the end, that I know and understand the person who is chronicled. For a subject such as Marie-Therese, the author must bridge the centuries so that the modern reader can actually understand a believer in the divine right of kings. Here, Nagel shows that she has come to know her subject and this period in France and she communicates it very well.
History certainly has some interesting twists and turns. The most interesting to me, in this book, is the support of the British monarchy for the Bourbon exiles not long after concluding a war against them. Another smaller curiosity is how in exile, in the rudest of circumstances, the royals maintain protocol. They bow before each other and the leave rooms in a prescribed order.
Susan Nagel does a wonderful job. For anyone interested in European history, she has created an excellent read.
Next in importance to me when I read a biography is feeling, at the end, that I know and understand the person who is chronicled. For a subject such as Marie-Therese, the author must bridge the centuries so that the modern reader can actually understand a believer in the divine right of kings. Here, Nagel shows that she has come to know her subject and this period in France and she communicates it very well.
History certainly has some interesting twists and turns. The most interesting to me, in this book, is the support of the British monarchy for the Bourbon exiles not long after concluding a war against them. Another smaller curiosity is how in exile, in the rudest of circumstances, the royals maintain protocol. They bow before each other and the leave rooms in a prescribed order.
Susan Nagel does a wonderful job. For anyone interested in European history, she has created an excellent read.
February 12, 2015
The fate of the daughter of Marie Antoinette and Louis XVI
August 17, 2016
Such a sad, sad, story.
November 17, 2019
I didn't know if I was going to make it through the first dozen chapters of this book because of the tragic events of the revolution that so impacted the French royal family. That Marie-Therese could come through that time without bitterness, hate and enormous anger is a testament to the faith that her family instilled in her and in the God that she sought refuge in time and time again. It wasn't as though life after the revolution was a piece of, dare I say, "cake". She lived through many upsetting and turbulent times. I'm sure she experienced many instances of deja-vu when history seemed intent on repeating itself (c'mon France). Yet she never gave up or shrank from what she felt she needed to do. She didn't flee to a convent and live the rest of her life away from the cruel world, which I'm convinced she had the right to do from the moment she was freed from her imprisonment. I asked myself many times while reading, "Why doesn't she just forget about France and go and live the rest of her life in peace somewhere?" She was not a coward, she felt the purpose of her life and could not live it selfishly or in weakness. She cherished the memory of her parents, her Aunt Elisabeth, and her beloved brother. It seemed to me that she tried to live her life in a way that would honor not only their memory, but honor all that her parents and aunt had imparted to her through their instruction and their example. She was a singular woman. I'm glad that I was able to read about her and her extraordinary life. This book is a good character study of a strong and principled woman, who did not let circumstances determine her happiness or diminish her dignity and grace.
February 24, 2018
I really enjoyed this book. Having read a lot of Marie Antoinette biographies, it became quite difficult finding Marie-Thérèse biographies.
The only survivor of the royal family sent to the Temple, Marie-Thérèse comes across as a strong, independent, confident and regal woman. It was incredibly interesting to read about her life after the deaths of Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette.
The book itself felt quite easy to read. It was well researched and well written and I really enjoyed reading it.
My major complaint about this book was that it was supposed to tell the story of the Dark Countess, and small paragraphs were dedicated to her and the Dark Count occasionally, but I didn’t really learn much about either of them. I didn’t come out of the book knowing much more about them than I did going in. It also disrupted the flow of the book.
The only survivor of the royal family sent to the Temple, Marie-Thérèse comes across as a strong, independent, confident and regal woman. It was incredibly interesting to read about her life after the deaths of Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette.
The book itself felt quite easy to read. It was well researched and well written and I really enjoyed reading it.
My major complaint about this book was that it was supposed to tell the story of the Dark Countess, and small paragraphs were dedicated to her and the Dark Count occasionally, but I didn’t really learn much about either of them. I didn’t come out of the book knowing much more about them than I did going in. It also disrupted the flow of the book.
September 2, 2020
One of my favorite history books. I have read it numerous times. It does an excellent job in chronicling the French revolution from the monarchist point of view. Also, Marie-Therese's role in the restoration of the monarchy going through the Revolutions of 1830 and 1848. Also discusses the questions around what happened to her brother, Louis XVII. There are also questions around if there was a switch of the real Marie-Therese after she was released from imprisonment in 1796. I'm not one to believe conspiracy theories, but there is substantial evidence to support this claim. One of the intriguing mysteries alongside the supposed death of Tsar Alexander 1 of Russia.
Highly recommend this book!
Highly recommend this book!
August 9, 2018
I has familiar with the history of the French Revolution and familiar with her parents but I didn't know much about Marie-Térèse with the exception of the fact that she died childless. This was a fasinating account of her life, with exceptional detail and sympathetic eye on the Royal family. I found that the details were sometimes a bit too much (and heavy), but it was a compliment to the story.
October 11, 2018
Very informative about her whole life. I liked how she gave multiple accounts of situations. She allowed for theories to be told as well as what in her opinion most likely occurred.
She went very fast, and I had a hard time keeping names and nobility’s straight in my head. But the overall story of her life was well portrayed.
She went very fast, and I had a hard time keeping names and nobility’s straight in my head. But the overall story of her life was well portrayed.
January 11, 2021
3.5 it was very interesting at times, especially the first half, but it dragged a bit at others.
July 9, 2023
Marie Therese Charlotte was the eldest of the four children born to Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette. As such she was styled "Child of France" and Madame Royale. She was the only survivor of the nuclear royal family imprisoned in the Temple during the Revolution. Her brother Louis Joseph, the first Dauphin, had died in 1789 during the meeting of the Estates General that directly triggered the fall of the monarchy. Her father, mother, and surrogate mother --- Louis' sister Elisabeth --- were guillotined, with the news of their deaths concealed from Marie Therese until over two years later. He second brother, the seven year-old Louis Charles, became the Dauphin following his brother's death, and Louis XVII after January 21, 1793, and was so treated by his mother until the boy was removed from contact with Marie Antoinette, Madame Elisabeth and Marie Therese. He was systematically tortured until his death in 1795. Though her room was below his at the Temple, Marie Therese had only one more sight of Louis Charles before his death, although they did not speak and he was probably too far gone to recognize his sister. Unlike the Russian Imperial Family's captivity, the French royals suffered a great deal during imprisonment. As the only survivor, Marie Therese represented a powerful piece on the European political chessboard, and both her Uncle Louis XVII and her first cousins the Holy Roman Emperor and Empress vied for control of her person once the Directory released her in a prisoner swap. Ultimately the teenager sided with the Bourbon part of her heritage. She married her first cousin, the duc d'Angouleme. While not a love match, both parties had enormous mutual respect and affection. The union sustained her, and eventually led her to the title of Dauphine, and according to strict legitimists, Queen of France for about an hour after Charles X abdicated in 1830, and before Angouleme also signed the succession over to his nephew. The new "king" was thus the ten year old son of his assassinated brother the duc d'Berry.
Throughout her peripatetic life, Marie Therese displayed enormous self-control in public. She was a thorough royalist who wanted nothing more than a return to the ancien regime and an absolute monarchy. She was thwarted by her Uncle Louis XVIII, who was more clear-eyed about what had been lost. He espoused a national Charter or constitution, presented by the National Assembly after the first abdication by Napoleon. It was a condition of the Bourbon Restoration.
Marie Therese spent the bulk of her life either imprisoned or in exile. By all accounts, she was formidable. Napoleon famously called her the "only man in the Bourbon family" when the Dauphine was the only royal to try and rally opposition during the Hundred Days. Some people found her cold. She was a notoriously arrogant child at Versailles, and that reputation persisted throughout her life. Child of Terror makes the case that this reputation was unfair. Marie Therese transitioned from childhood to a self-possessed young woman with her own inner resources to sustain her in solitude. In an act of will, Marie Therese spent much of the time after Elisabeth's execution (1794) refusing to speak. When visited in the Temple by government officials, she steadily worked needlepoint and refused to look at them. If necessary, the young girl made monosyllabic answers.
Once safely out of France, her personality emerged. While always reserved unless with people she trusted, the duchesse d'Angouleme was lively, loving and very open in letters to old friends and family. There are numerous quotes in the book cribbed from the memoirs of people who met her that cited her charm, carriage --- a distinctive walk was something she shared with her mother --- and ability to work crowds. But she was also the survivor of trauma, and what we might now call PTSD never left her. Marie Therese mourned her dead until her own in 1851.
Susan Nagel has written a very enjoyable if not completely convincing life. It has an excellent depiction of Marie Therese's life from 1779 until her marriage, as well as the Restoration. It doesn't exactly skim over the 21 years after Charles X's abdication, but to be fair, Therese retreated into being a loving great-aunt to Henri, Comte de Chambord, the legitimist heir to the throne of France. Of course, there were other Bourbons in the running. Nagel hates the Orleans branch of the family because of Louis Philippe's treachery to the senior branch, to say nothing of his regicide father. It is yet another moment where you think Nagel has over-identified with her subject. Marie Therese is largely uncritical of her uncle; so is Nagel. Louis XVIII bears some responsibility for the traducing of his brother and sister-in-law in the run-up to July 14th. She was so devoted to the idea of monarchy that she regarded Louis XVIII (who at various times during his own exile was reduced to living in one room flats above German stores) as the King of France, whose wishes she was bound by familial and feudal ties to obey. Indeed, she was far more loyal to her uncles Provence (Louis XVIII) and Artois (Charles X) than they had ever been to Louis XVI.
Her life was filled with drama and trauma, and Nagel certainly captures those elements. But she makes elementary mistakes that either she or a decent editor might have caught. Madame DuBarry was not 16 but 26 when she met the new Dauphine; the infant Sophie Beatrice lived for almost a year, not the few days Nagel assigns her life. The treatment of the Angouleme marriage is somewhat superficial. Again, Nagel makes no secret of what can only be taken as her personal feelings about the men and women in the duchesse's life. She also interrupts Marie Therese's history with that of the "Dark Countess", whom many people identified as the real daughter of Louis XVI. She certainly was not Marie Therese, despite the allegations of a substitute Madame Royale who was sent to Vienna instead. Who was she? No idea after reading the book, but Nagel casually throws in the fact that when she died in 1837, the "Dark Countess" (she never appeared unveiled) had several of Marie Antoinette's personal bibelots and toiletries in her possession. The numerous false Dauphins who inflicted themselves upon Marie Therese throughout her life were disproven by either investigation, or in the case of Naundorff, the most successful, by DNA evidence in the 21st century (a la those women who claimed to be the Grand Duchess Anastasia after the 1918 massacre). Still, she never ceased to nurture hope that by some miracle her brother had survived. His heart did. The doctor who performed Louis Charles' autopsy surreptitiously removed the boy's heart. He and subsequent holders tried to get it into Marie Therese's possession. In 2007 genetic testing revealed it was Louis Charles' heart, and it has now been encased in crystal and buried at the Abbey of St. Denis, the traditional resting place for French royals.
If Nagel is correct, Marie Therese was formed by the furnace of the Revolution. But her importance greatly diminished when she and Angouleme remained childless. Nagel also attributes the possibility of an illegitimate daughter for Louis XVI, who was "adopted" by the Queen and remained part of the immediate family until their forced removal to Paris in October, 1789. She was frantic that this girl be protected, as indeed she was. There are hints that she replaced Marie Therese, but of course none of it can be proven, and indeed the idea is beyond improbable. Louis XVI did not consummate his marriage for eight years, and by temperament he was faithful to his wife. Again, however, Nagel leans upon a purported sexual relationship between Louis and Gabrielle de Polignac, Marie Antoinette's dearest friend and Marie Therese's first governess. This is Louis XVI we're talking about, although Nagel does make the interesting point that Marie Therese saw her father dismiss Fersen from accompanying the family on the doomed escape Fersen had helped arrange. The encounter with his wife's rumored lover cannot have been easy, but the King carried it off with is customary sang-froid.
I enjoyed reading this, which is why I gave it three stars. But you do have to pick your way through a fair amount of polemics. Still, it is the only modern biography of an interesting figure.
Throughout her peripatetic life, Marie Therese displayed enormous self-control in public. She was a thorough royalist who wanted nothing more than a return to the ancien regime and an absolute monarchy. She was thwarted by her Uncle Louis XVIII, who was more clear-eyed about what had been lost. He espoused a national Charter or constitution, presented by the National Assembly after the first abdication by Napoleon. It was a condition of the Bourbon Restoration.
Marie Therese spent the bulk of her life either imprisoned or in exile. By all accounts, she was formidable. Napoleon famously called her the "only man in the Bourbon family" when the Dauphine was the only royal to try and rally opposition during the Hundred Days. Some people found her cold. She was a notoriously arrogant child at Versailles, and that reputation persisted throughout her life. Child of Terror makes the case that this reputation was unfair. Marie Therese transitioned from childhood to a self-possessed young woman with her own inner resources to sustain her in solitude. In an act of will, Marie Therese spent much of the time after Elisabeth's execution (1794) refusing to speak. When visited in the Temple by government officials, she steadily worked needlepoint and refused to look at them. If necessary, the young girl made monosyllabic answers.
Once safely out of France, her personality emerged. While always reserved unless with people she trusted, the duchesse d'Angouleme was lively, loving and very open in letters to old friends and family. There are numerous quotes in the book cribbed from the memoirs of people who met her that cited her charm, carriage --- a distinctive walk was something she shared with her mother --- and ability to work crowds. But she was also the survivor of trauma, and what we might now call PTSD never left her. Marie Therese mourned her dead until her own in 1851.
Susan Nagel has written a very enjoyable if not completely convincing life. It has an excellent depiction of Marie Therese's life from 1779 until her marriage, as well as the Restoration. It doesn't exactly skim over the 21 years after Charles X's abdication, but to be fair, Therese retreated into being a loving great-aunt to Henri, Comte de Chambord, the legitimist heir to the throne of France. Of course, there were other Bourbons in the running. Nagel hates the Orleans branch of the family because of Louis Philippe's treachery to the senior branch, to say nothing of his regicide father. It is yet another moment where you think Nagel has over-identified with her subject. Marie Therese is largely uncritical of her uncle; so is Nagel. Louis XVIII bears some responsibility for the traducing of his brother and sister-in-law in the run-up to July 14th. She was so devoted to the idea of monarchy that she regarded Louis XVIII (who at various times during his own exile was reduced to living in one room flats above German stores) as the King of France, whose wishes she was bound by familial and feudal ties to obey. Indeed, she was far more loyal to her uncles Provence (Louis XVIII) and Artois (Charles X) than they had ever been to Louis XVI.
Her life was filled with drama and trauma, and Nagel certainly captures those elements. But she makes elementary mistakes that either she or a decent editor might have caught. Madame DuBarry was not 16 but 26 when she met the new Dauphine; the infant Sophie Beatrice lived for almost a year, not the few days Nagel assigns her life. The treatment of the Angouleme marriage is somewhat superficial. Again, Nagel makes no secret of what can only be taken as her personal feelings about the men and women in the duchesse's life. She also interrupts Marie Therese's history with that of the "Dark Countess", whom many people identified as the real daughter of Louis XVI. She certainly was not Marie Therese, despite the allegations of a substitute Madame Royale who was sent to Vienna instead. Who was she? No idea after reading the book, but Nagel casually throws in the fact that when she died in 1837, the "Dark Countess" (she never appeared unveiled) had several of Marie Antoinette's personal bibelots and toiletries in her possession. The numerous false Dauphins who inflicted themselves upon Marie Therese throughout her life were disproven by either investigation, or in the case of Naundorff, the most successful, by DNA evidence in the 21st century (a la those women who claimed to be the Grand Duchess Anastasia after the 1918 massacre). Still, she never ceased to nurture hope that by some miracle her brother had survived. His heart did. The doctor who performed Louis Charles' autopsy surreptitiously removed the boy's heart. He and subsequent holders tried to get it into Marie Therese's possession. In 2007 genetic testing revealed it was Louis Charles' heart, and it has now been encased in crystal and buried at the Abbey of St. Denis, the traditional resting place for French royals.
If Nagel is correct, Marie Therese was formed by the furnace of the Revolution. But her importance greatly diminished when she and Angouleme remained childless. Nagel also attributes the possibility of an illegitimate daughter for Louis XVI, who was "adopted" by the Queen and remained part of the immediate family until their forced removal to Paris in October, 1789. She was frantic that this girl be protected, as indeed she was. There are hints that she replaced Marie Therese, but of course none of it can be proven, and indeed the idea is beyond improbable. Louis XVI did not consummate his marriage for eight years, and by temperament he was faithful to his wife. Again, however, Nagel leans upon a purported sexual relationship between Louis and Gabrielle de Polignac, Marie Antoinette's dearest friend and Marie Therese's first governess. This is Louis XVI we're talking about, although Nagel does make the interesting point that Marie Therese saw her father dismiss Fersen from accompanying the family on the doomed escape Fersen had helped arrange. The encounter with his wife's rumored lover cannot have been easy, but the King carried it off with is customary sang-froid.
I enjoyed reading this, which is why I gave it three stars. But you do have to pick your way through a fair amount of polemics. Still, it is the only modern biography of an interesting figure.
November 16, 2019
4.5 stars. A fascinating book on an overlooked character in history that I really didn’t know anything about. It’s really made me want to look more into the French Revolution.
June 18, 2016
2.5
Let me preface this super mini review by saying that I think that part of my problem with this book was that I listened to it on audiobook. Keeping track of all of the people in the latter half of the book got to be a bit of a problem, especially because by the time I got about 3/4 of the way through the book I was, admittedly, a little bit bored.
My largest problem, however, was that I had a hard time believing some (I repeat: some, not all) of the things that the author said. While I knew next to nothing about Marie Antoinette's sole surviving daughter, I have read and researched extensively on Marie Antoinette herself. There were many instances during Marie Therese that I felt the information contradicted a lot of what I had previously read. I have a long list of things that I plan on researching after this book, so I'm not going to say that the information is entirely inaccurate, I just have my doubts. I will also be locating my physical copy of the book so that I can look at the sources she used and what not. I'll update my review with more thoughts after I compile my findings!
Also, all of that being said, I didn't necessarily dislike the book! I did find much of the information about Marie Therese to be very interesting, and I'm excited to research further!
Let me preface this super mini review by saying that I think that part of my problem with this book was that I listened to it on audiobook. Keeping track of all of the people in the latter half of the book got to be a bit of a problem, especially because by the time I got about 3/4 of the way through the book I was, admittedly, a little bit bored.
My largest problem, however, was that I had a hard time believing some (I repeat: some, not all) of the things that the author said. While I knew next to nothing about Marie Antoinette's sole surviving daughter, I have read and researched extensively on Marie Antoinette herself. There were many instances during Marie Therese that I felt the information contradicted a lot of what I had previously read. I have a long list of things that I plan on researching after this book, so I'm not going to say that the information is entirely inaccurate, I just have my doubts. I will also be locating my physical copy of the book so that I can look at the sources she used and what not. I'll update my review with more thoughts after I compile my findings!
Also, all of that being said, I didn't necessarily dislike the book! I did find much of the information about Marie Therese to be very interesting, and I'm excited to research further!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 198 reviews