The point that I was trying to make is that because of our own educational input, environmental backgrounds, we today believe ourselves to be superior to those who have gone before us. Then one day we may learn that we had already been a part of that civilization that had already preceded this one in a way that we may have to relearn something about ourselves, just to realize that we are not so superior simply because we are educated, have modern technology, streamlined communication, transportation, etc. In fact, if anything, we may have become backward in some respects since few of us could survive in a way that our ancestors had survived.
I was reading a story about one of our probes into space which is being programmed to die in the rings of Saturn, and about how Galileo had committed a kind of suicide in Jupiter. Because we can send cameras into space which transmit pictures back to us, we believe that we are an advanced civilization. It is a miracle of sorts that we can do this, observe the universe through manmade objects designed to help us understand the space around us.
In a certain sense, those kind of probes justify the courage it took to break away from a thought control upon humanity which had deemed Galileo a madman, a heretic, a deviate from accepted thought. The Church had been wrong, and the Church is what had such a tight control upon mankind in previous centuries. Today, people continue to question the gospels which are available for everyone to read, not just a few.
So with that understanding, it is easy to understand why today we might believe ourselves to be more knowledgeable, less superstitious, and possibly a better generation than previous generations who allowed Church fathers to influence their lives so much.
An important lesson for me to have learned is that while Alexander had been taught certain beliefs by Aristotle, Alexander adjusted his own thinking as he came to know and live amongst those who Aristotle had considered Barbarians, lower class citizens.
So it is with all of us who learn to throw away certain modes of thoughts after we encounter them for ourselves and learn otherwise. We learn to decide for ourselves instead of allowing false teaching to control our lives.
I did re-edit this page, as I am encountering one of those moments when I have to admit that I asked, I received, and just not to question it, but accept it. So be it.
Yours Truly
Janet Fauble at home
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Reverse Snobbery
I had to post a comment to my previous post simply because I have to admit a kind of reverse snobbery being now a citizen of the USA, a commoner, and a socio-econimcally in between regarding social rank in this nation now.
I studied sociology in college at Michigan State University, and because I came from an ordinary, middle class family, who had been deprived due to the depression of the 30's, I had no social pretensions of any kind. The one person with whom I can identify the most in all of these many historical lifetime figures is probably Alexander the Great.
Why? Well, for this reason. Alexander came from Macedon, a region known for its crudities more than its class, elegance, or sophistication. The inhabitants were people of the land, farmers, miners, and hardworking people, and Philip and his kingdom were considered a bit crude and rude in comparison to the highly educated elite of Athens, Greece.
The men of Macedonia and Philip's court and army were tough, mean, brawling, drunken, and disciplined men, as was Philip. Alexander is a bit of a different character, choosing to distance himself from his father more than emulate him in many respects. His mother influenced him from her telling him stories about gods and divinity that probably Philip did not encourage as much in the training of his son for the military life.
How I would relate to that today in my life?
Good question. I will try not to embarrass any of my relatives by admitting too much to how my family has had its share of drunks, farmers, miners, and military in it...just suffice it to say that that is one way in which I relate, although we had a few who did get a higher education, and attained success that way also before I and my brother and cousins likewise did the same.
The reverse snobbery is that today as a commoner, a citizen of the USA I have been educated to have a kind of disdain and contempt for the royal class in society.
I had always taught the USA is a country which has no kings or queens, and that we are a people who practice law and order based upon service, desire, and public popularity rather than by bloodlines and family...all Royals are born to rule, but in a democratic republic all elected officials are elected to office by the will of the people, and by following certain required laws regarding eligibility and fitness and readiness for the office. Of course, all these rules and laws are often taken very lightly regarding the latter qualifications.
So when I was browsing through the topics of kings and queens, I was also unknownst to myself laughing at myself, but not realizing it.
In my opinion, I would light into Alexander for all the reasons that historians do...since all the stories told about him come from only a few sources, and nobody really knows him (except me, of course, now after all this time)in today's world except what they have read and learned through many generations of time passing distorted stories down to one another. What kind of real idea is that? That Curtius, Arrian, or some other historian, Plutarch, could know anything about him other than what they had copied and rewrote from their own sources. It is all so ridiculous as to be unbelievable, but I will admit that some of it probably has happened, and some records were probably kept and copied that remained close to the truth.
My last vision of Alexander was not very long ago; in fact, two were in about the same time period. I have not had any more time returns to the SunKing since I left Paris, France a year ago this month. I had some experiences there that confirmed for me something that I believe about Philip, his brother, and I came into knowledge of things in the Chateau that proved to me that my visions are a match to the reality.
But Alexander is a real flesh and blood man, who actually loved his reckless style of living, and who relished the aspect of a conflict in which he could turn lose his Macedonian soldiers to wreak havoc if defied.
While it was all hard work, laborious, and tedious, it was also exhiliarating, exciting, and dangerous. Alexander thrived on that kind of adrenalin rush, but because he was also a slavishly devoted man to the gods of the time, he created a sense of duty that was awesome to those who were a part of it. Altars had to be built, sacrifices had to be given, and devotions had to be made so that his cause would be fulfilled. On one hand, he is driven to excell, and on the other hand, he is thrilled by all the action and labor, no matter how difficult. It is all a challenge that he intends to meet and therefore does.
So while one can criticize him for being somewhat maniacal, cruel, and heartless, he
demands that he be honored and respected for his authority as the King of not only Macedon but all Asia.
He has been labeled all kinds of dishonest terms in my opinion, as has Louis XIV,after I finally learned all that I could about him as well. While Alexander seems to heap ridicule upon himself at this games and entertainments in wearing strange and unusual costumes, appears to be always under the influence of omens and oracles from strange priests and priestesses, goes against the grain of the advice of his generals and soldiers, wearing clothing that offends, marrying women who are not met with approval, he still is recognized as the only leader who can hold this assortment of many soldiers from many tribes and villages together. He increases his military as he wages war against his adversaries.
So we have Louis XIV then influenced by this strange man from Macedon so that Louis also believes that he can rule and lead to be another Alexander. While Alexander wore a variety of strange paraphernalia as helmets on his head, and posed as lions, tigers, elephants, etc., Louis then donned wigs to give him a few inches in size to maintain a decorum at his court that today looks odd, peculiar, and what many people call a fop. He wore pumps or high heels, extravagantly well made clothing, and strange wigs. He built a huge chateau for himself when France already had how many numbers of chateau available throughout the land...Why another?
So sure, it is easy to critize, and I will continue this essay later...
I studied sociology in college at Michigan State University, and because I came from an ordinary, middle class family, who had been deprived due to the depression of the 30's, I had no social pretensions of any kind. The one person with whom I can identify the most in all of these many historical lifetime figures is probably Alexander the Great.
Why? Well, for this reason. Alexander came from Macedon, a region known for its crudities more than its class, elegance, or sophistication. The inhabitants were people of the land, farmers, miners, and hardworking people, and Philip and his kingdom were considered a bit crude and rude in comparison to the highly educated elite of Athens, Greece.
The men of Macedonia and Philip's court and army were tough, mean, brawling, drunken, and disciplined men, as was Philip. Alexander is a bit of a different character, choosing to distance himself from his father more than emulate him in many respects. His mother influenced him from her telling him stories about gods and divinity that probably Philip did not encourage as much in the training of his son for the military life.
How I would relate to that today in my life?
Good question. I will try not to embarrass any of my relatives by admitting too much to how my family has had its share of drunks, farmers, miners, and military in it...just suffice it to say that that is one way in which I relate, although we had a few who did get a higher education, and attained success that way also before I and my brother and cousins likewise did the same.
The reverse snobbery is that today as a commoner, a citizen of the USA I have been educated to have a kind of disdain and contempt for the royal class in society.
I had always taught the USA is a country which has no kings or queens, and that we are a people who practice law and order based upon service, desire, and public popularity rather than by bloodlines and family...all Royals are born to rule, but in a democratic republic all elected officials are elected to office by the will of the people, and by following certain required laws regarding eligibility and fitness and readiness for the office. Of course, all these rules and laws are often taken very lightly regarding the latter qualifications.
So when I was browsing through the topics of kings and queens, I was also unknownst to myself laughing at myself, but not realizing it.
In my opinion, I would light into Alexander for all the reasons that historians do...since all the stories told about him come from only a few sources, and nobody really knows him (except me, of course, now after all this time)in today's world except what they have read and learned through many generations of time passing distorted stories down to one another. What kind of real idea is that? That Curtius, Arrian, or some other historian, Plutarch, could know anything about him other than what they had copied and rewrote from their own sources. It is all so ridiculous as to be unbelievable, but I will admit that some of it probably has happened, and some records were probably kept and copied that remained close to the truth.
My last vision of Alexander was not very long ago; in fact, two were in about the same time period. I have not had any more time returns to the SunKing since I left Paris, France a year ago this month. I had some experiences there that confirmed for me something that I believe about Philip, his brother, and I came into knowledge of things in the Chateau that proved to me that my visions are a match to the reality.
But Alexander is a real flesh and blood man, who actually loved his reckless style of living, and who relished the aspect of a conflict in which he could turn lose his Macedonian soldiers to wreak havoc if defied.
While it was all hard work, laborious, and tedious, it was also exhiliarating, exciting, and dangerous. Alexander thrived on that kind of adrenalin rush, but because he was also a slavishly devoted man to the gods of the time, he created a sense of duty that was awesome to those who were a part of it. Altars had to be built, sacrifices had to be given, and devotions had to be made so that his cause would be fulfilled. On one hand, he is driven to excell, and on the other hand, he is thrilled by all the action and labor, no matter how difficult. It is all a challenge that he intends to meet and therefore does.
So while one can criticize him for being somewhat maniacal, cruel, and heartless, he
demands that he be honored and respected for his authority as the King of not only Macedon but all Asia.
He has been labeled all kinds of dishonest terms in my opinion, as has Louis XIV,after I finally learned all that I could about him as well. While Alexander seems to heap ridicule upon himself at this games and entertainments in wearing strange and unusual costumes, appears to be always under the influence of omens and oracles from strange priests and priestesses, goes against the grain of the advice of his generals and soldiers, wearing clothing that offends, marrying women who are not met with approval, he still is recognized as the only leader who can hold this assortment of many soldiers from many tribes and villages together. He increases his military as he wages war against his adversaries.
So we have Louis XIV then influenced by this strange man from Macedon so that Louis also believes that he can rule and lead to be another Alexander. While Alexander wore a variety of strange paraphernalia as helmets on his head, and posed as lions, tigers, elephants, etc., Louis then donned wigs to give him a few inches in size to maintain a decorum at his court that today looks odd, peculiar, and what many people call a fop. He wore pumps or high heels, extravagantly well made clothing, and strange wigs. He built a huge chateau for himself when France already had how many numbers of chateau available throughout the land...Why another?
So sure, it is easy to critize, and I will continue this essay later...
Monday, October 4, 2010
Upshot of this
One thing that I enjoy are magazines such as Horizon who publish articles of this kind. I have always found the older books that discuss historical figures to be so interesting in comparison to modern day or contempoary works. No matter which historical figure of the past, the books that were written in earlier times often have a richness and reveal an author's insights better than those which are today apparently assembled through computer creativity.
When a person takes an interest in a historical entity of the past, one has to wonder why. Is it simply because there is such a large amount of material available on the subject that it is easy to compile and rewrite many essays about the subject, or is it because the topic truly has captured the imagination of the writer.
I will admit that I am not much into historical fiction. It always bothers me when people try to put words into someone's mouth. If the author does not create the character to appear in the way that I believe that person to have been like, I simply cannot stand to read what to me is a false misrepresentation of a subject.
But it is clear to me that if Louis XIV had been that aware of all the information about his own father, that he would have certainly made certain that the record of his own life would have been shaped as he wanted it to be. As a child, he was at the mercy of his mother. And speaking of his mother, there is no doubt that many pitied and felt sorrow for her to have to be at the mercy of her husband who had so many suspicions about her.
Her life story and her cause of death makes her one of the most unevied women in the history of courts of Europe. While Princess Diana has made modern day life at the court public, Anne of Austria had even more embarrassing and stressful problems in her life as Queen. At least, Prince Charles and Princess Diana did perform the necessary service and duty to the throne by delivering England two heirs to the throne. Anne of Austria was always under threat of deportation to Spain if not able to deliver a child as required. Certainly, she did fare better than Anne Boleyn of England in an earlier time, but her life in France was as difficult as any could imagine. Luckily, the king had made a petition to the Virgin within the time frame of the conception of the young boy prince who became the SunKing. There are many superstitions about the birth of the child. He was called God's gift thanks to a prayer being answered. There never was any doubt in Louis XIII's mind that the child was his own son.
Queen Anne of Austria died of breast cancer. The cancerous growths were cut out of her skin as she progressed...imagine that in a time when there is no anaesthetic, poor dressings, and few pain killers. This woman suffered terribly. Louis XIV loved his mother and credited her with saving his throne and crown for him. He paid great homage to her at her death.
Fortunately, for me, I finally have come to learn of this story of life in France. It is a very touching story for me to contemplate as I truly believe that the king was delivered to his mother and father as a part of God's plan for life on earth. It has come to me through spiritual guides and my dictum God's will be done. I believe it is God's will for me to know of it.
When a person takes an interest in a historical entity of the past, one has to wonder why. Is it simply because there is such a large amount of material available on the subject that it is easy to compile and rewrite many essays about the subject, or is it because the topic truly has captured the imagination of the writer.
I will admit that I am not much into historical fiction. It always bothers me when people try to put words into someone's mouth. If the author does not create the character to appear in the way that I believe that person to have been like, I simply cannot stand to read what to me is a false misrepresentation of a subject.
But it is clear to me that if Louis XIV had been that aware of all the information about his own father, that he would have certainly made certain that the record of his own life would have been shaped as he wanted it to be. As a child, he was at the mercy of his mother. And speaking of his mother, there is no doubt that many pitied and felt sorrow for her to have to be at the mercy of her husband who had so many suspicions about her.
Her life story and her cause of death makes her one of the most unevied women in the history of courts of Europe. While Princess Diana has made modern day life at the court public, Anne of Austria had even more embarrassing and stressful problems in her life as Queen. At least, Prince Charles and Princess Diana did perform the necessary service and duty to the throne by delivering England two heirs to the throne. Anne of Austria was always under threat of deportation to Spain if not able to deliver a child as required. Certainly, she did fare better than Anne Boleyn of England in an earlier time, but her life in France was as difficult as any could imagine. Luckily, the king had made a petition to the Virgin within the time frame of the conception of the young boy prince who became the SunKing. There are many superstitions about the birth of the child. He was called God's gift thanks to a prayer being answered. There never was any doubt in Louis XIII's mind that the child was his own son.
Queen Anne of Austria died of breast cancer. The cancerous growths were cut out of her skin as she progressed...imagine that in a time when there is no anaesthetic, poor dressings, and few pain killers. This woman suffered terribly. Louis XIV loved his mother and credited her with saving his throne and crown for him. He paid great homage to her at her death.
Fortunately, for me, I finally have come to learn of this story of life in France. It is a very touching story for me to contemplate as I truly believe that the king was delivered to his mother and father as a part of God's plan for life on earth. It has come to me through spiritual guides and my dictum God's will be done. I believe it is God's will for me to know of it.
Conclusion of Louis XIII
After one of his visits to the convent to converse with Sister Angelique, a storm rose that made it impossible for him to go to Versailles or Saint Maur. His bedroom at the Louvre was not prepared for him, but Guitaut, Captain of the Guard, spoke up with his usual boldness and suggested that the Queen would have suitable lodging and even supper for him. Louis XIII rejected this idea to wait out the storm...The storm became more violent and the captain again offered his suggestion, but the king said that the queen supped and went to bed too late for him, but the captain insisted so that the king finally relented. Guitaut went to the Queen to tell her that the king would be coming and to be prepared for him.
"They supped together. The king spent the night with the queen, and nine months later, the Queen (Anne of Austria) gave birth to the future SunKing, Louis XIV.
This story is told by a French historian, Father Griffet, with such simple directness that it almost disarms one's suspicions.
Believe it or not, the king and queen two years later conceive another child, Philip.
On May 14, 1643, Louis XIII has been bled too many times, taken too many enemas, and too many drugs from what seems to me to be an incompetent physician. The king bitterly accused him ( Dr. Bouvard) of being the cause of his too early demise. He was only 41.
The king's last wish was to see his son come to his majority were he to live so that he could retire to the hunting lodge at the Versailles. There, he would be able to save his own soul and contemplate salvation while his son could replace him on the throne.
I suspect that last wish may be why the Sun King devised his chateau to be built at the site of his father's favorite escape: the hunting lodge.
Louis XIV is the exact opposite of his father as he had no fear of women whatsoever and appears to be like his grandfather, Henry IV, who had a harem of women. Like grandfather, like grandson.
Louis XIII may have found a more likely successor in his second son, Philip, who had interests in both men and women. I believe that Philip resembles his father quite closely in many ways.
Where Louis XIII suffered a terribly anguished life, his son, Louis XIV, had the capacity to celebrate life much differently and much more enjoyably. It is a strange contrast to consider.
"They supped together. The king spent the night with the queen, and nine months later, the Queen (Anne of Austria) gave birth to the future SunKing, Louis XIV.
This story is told by a French historian, Father Griffet, with such simple directness that it almost disarms one's suspicions.
Believe it or not, the king and queen two years later conceive another child, Philip.
On May 14, 1643, Louis XIII has been bled too many times, taken too many enemas, and too many drugs from what seems to me to be an incompetent physician. The king bitterly accused him ( Dr. Bouvard) of being the cause of his too early demise. He was only 41.
The king's last wish was to see his son come to his majority were he to live so that he could retire to the hunting lodge at the Versailles. There, he would be able to save his own soul and contemplate salvation while his son could replace him on the throne.
I suspect that last wish may be why the Sun King devised his chateau to be built at the site of his father's favorite escape: the hunting lodge.
Louis XIV is the exact opposite of his father as he had no fear of women whatsoever and appears to be like his grandfather, Henry IV, who had a harem of women. Like grandfather, like grandson.
Louis XIII may have found a more likely successor in his second son, Philip, who had interests in both men and women. I believe that Philip resembles his father quite closely in many ways.
Where Louis XIII suffered a terribly anguished life, his son, Louis XIV, had the capacity to celebrate life much differently and much more enjoyably. It is a strange contrast to consider.
Continuation of Louis XIII
"If only my father, the king, had lived another twenty years", Louis XIII said, as his father's great popularity was his own personal defeat. The next paragraph is ridiculous but I will write it anyway: A few days later the new king of France was spanked for obstinately refusing to say his prayers. (He is eight,remember?) "At least," he said to his tutor, "don't strike too hard." Afterward he went to see the queen, now regent, who had ordered the whipping. She rose to make him the curtsy due him as king. "I would rather," he said wistfully,'"not have so many curtsies and honors, and not be whipped." On September 17, 1610, Louis XIII was again spanked; on September 21, he signed a military alliance with England.
At ten, Louis was writing verses and slaughtering game. And from that age on he was taming falcons; ultimately, he rached the height of taming the great eagle. He found his father figure in the form of an ambitious falconer, Charles d'Albert, Duc de Luynes, twenty-trhee years his senior. Rapidly Luynes rose in power, becoming Louis's favorite, and his bedroom Louis's refuge. Thus Louis flew his birds, painted, danced, and composed, dreamed of - and wrote verses to-Luynes, cooked poached eggs, played the lute, and at the age of fourteen married the Spanish infanta, who was five days older than the King. She was blonde and might have been pretty had it not been for her long Habsburg nose. Indeed Anne of Austria (her mother was Margaret of Austria) looked remarkably like Louis, which in view of their Habsburg consanguinity was no coincidence.
They were married in Bordeaux on November 25, 1615. (Remember 100 years later on September 1, their son Louis XIV dies). After the ceremony they each went to their separate chambers in the archbishop's palace and supped. Tired, the little king ate in bed while others around him regaled him with coarse stories intended to give him "confidence".
Toward eight o'clock that evening, the Queen Mother came to him, and said," It is not enough to be married, my son. You must now go to your queen who is waiting." He responded, "Madame, I was awaiting your command. If it pleases you, I will go to her with you."
To condense this, the king was placed in bed with the young queen and they spent two hours or so together in the bed, and the king is said to have always remembered this moment with revulsion. It took him three years before he could ever get into bed with her again, and another twenty years before he was able to become a father. Before those events could happen, Luynes had to be removed.
Luynes was persuaded to marry a beautiful young woman, Marie de Rohan, who was very wealthy and highborn. The marriage was successful but the pleas to the king to create an heir fell on deaf ears as he protested the state of his health and his age as reasons for why he should not try to produce an heir. Sadly, he had to watch another couple perform the act of creation twice round to see how it is done, to encourage him to engage in it himself, but while his surrogate father encouraged him to go to the queen, he resisted. In the end, Luynes had to carry the adolescent boy to the young girl, crying and weeping all the while. He was watched while he made his best attempts twice and it was recorded for the medical records. He left at two in the morning to sleep longer than usual the next day until nine o'clock.
The chastity of the young king was politically important to many: Spain, Catholics, and even the Duke of Savoy. On January 30, 1619, the nuncio wrote Pope Paul V:"The King finally decided conjiungersi colla Regina...Since the first night, except for one, their majesties continue to come together.....But for the sake of the king's health, it will be seen to that His Majesty goes to the queen at properly spaced intervals." An interval of two weeks was recommended by the doctors to insure a dauphin.
The king had only one friend -- the Duc de Luynes --and he died in 1621. All he had left was Richelieu and the Versailles. So he went gaming and hunting, and created the little hunting lodge which was designed for men only...no accomodations for women at all.
Then Louis XIII was forced to choose between his minister, Cardinal Richelieu and his mother, Marie d' Medici. This is a dramatic story in which he chose Richelieu and sent his mother to exile.
He then built his hunting lodge even finer as his escape from the cares and woes of Paris and government. He made it so that he would not have women around to create problems for him, but he appears to have had two mistresses, Marie de Hautefort, who terrified him, and Madame de La Fayette, who when he asked her to move to Versailles with him, chose to enter a convent instead. It is said his sigh of relief was audible. He would visit the now Sister Angelique in her convent of Sainte Marie several times before the events which changed history.
continued in next post.
At ten, Louis was writing verses and slaughtering game. And from that age on he was taming falcons; ultimately, he rached the height of taming the great eagle. He found his father figure in the form of an ambitious falconer, Charles d'Albert, Duc de Luynes, twenty-trhee years his senior. Rapidly Luynes rose in power, becoming Louis's favorite, and his bedroom Louis's refuge. Thus Louis flew his birds, painted, danced, and composed, dreamed of - and wrote verses to-Luynes, cooked poached eggs, played the lute, and at the age of fourteen married the Spanish infanta, who was five days older than the King. She was blonde and might have been pretty had it not been for her long Habsburg nose. Indeed Anne of Austria (her mother was Margaret of Austria) looked remarkably like Louis, which in view of their Habsburg consanguinity was no coincidence.
They were married in Bordeaux on November 25, 1615. (Remember 100 years later on September 1, their son Louis XIV dies). After the ceremony they each went to their separate chambers in the archbishop's palace and supped. Tired, the little king ate in bed while others around him regaled him with coarse stories intended to give him "confidence".
Toward eight o'clock that evening, the Queen Mother came to him, and said," It is not enough to be married, my son. You must now go to your queen who is waiting." He responded, "Madame, I was awaiting your command. If it pleases you, I will go to her with you."
To condense this, the king was placed in bed with the young queen and they spent two hours or so together in the bed, and the king is said to have always remembered this moment with revulsion. It took him three years before he could ever get into bed with her again, and another twenty years before he was able to become a father. Before those events could happen, Luynes had to be removed.
Luynes was persuaded to marry a beautiful young woman, Marie de Rohan, who was very wealthy and highborn. The marriage was successful but the pleas to the king to create an heir fell on deaf ears as he protested the state of his health and his age as reasons for why he should not try to produce an heir. Sadly, he had to watch another couple perform the act of creation twice round to see how it is done, to encourage him to engage in it himself, but while his surrogate father encouraged him to go to the queen, he resisted. In the end, Luynes had to carry the adolescent boy to the young girl, crying and weeping all the while. He was watched while he made his best attempts twice and it was recorded for the medical records. He left at two in the morning to sleep longer than usual the next day until nine o'clock.
The chastity of the young king was politically important to many: Spain, Catholics, and even the Duke of Savoy. On January 30, 1619, the nuncio wrote Pope Paul V:"The King finally decided conjiungersi colla Regina...Since the first night, except for one, their majesties continue to come together.....But for the sake of the king's health, it will be seen to that His Majesty goes to the queen at properly spaced intervals." An interval of two weeks was recommended by the doctors to insure a dauphin.
The king had only one friend -- the Duc de Luynes --and he died in 1621. All he had left was Richelieu and the Versailles. So he went gaming and hunting, and created the little hunting lodge which was designed for men only...no accomodations for women at all.
Then Louis XIII was forced to choose between his minister, Cardinal Richelieu and his mother, Marie d' Medici. This is a dramatic story in which he chose Richelieu and sent his mother to exile.
He then built his hunting lodge even finer as his escape from the cares and woes of Paris and government. He made it so that he would not have women around to create problems for him, but he appears to have had two mistresses, Marie de Hautefort, who terrified him, and Madame de La Fayette, who when he asked her to move to Versailles with him, chose to enter a convent instead. It is said his sigh of relief was audible. He would visit the now Sister Angelique in her convent of Sainte Marie several times before the events which changed history.
continued in next post.
Louis XIII
Louis XIII is one of the strangest kings in the history of France. Joseph Barry has written an article about the famous father of King Louis XIV which is published in the summer of 68 in Horizon magazine.
Rather than write out the entire article as I did with Rochefoucauld in the previous posts, I will paraphrase it and reduce it to a few pages in this blog. It is rather extensive and long.
Joseph Barry introduces the story of Louis XIII through the use of the hunting lodge which Louis XIII had built to accomodate himself and his hunters in the region of the Versailles. Louis loved to hunt, especially birds. Barry alleges that the hunting lodge is built from Louis's fear of women. This man had a very difficult rearing as a child, but he was born to Marie d'Medici, wife of Henry IV, at the Chateau du Fontainbleau in full view of his cousins, the Princes of the Blood, who were to bear witness to the birth of the child. Because questions of legitimacy could instigate civil wars, the witnessing of the birth of a child was a long term custom of French royals, not instituted by the Bourbons, but continued to be practiced by them. After the birth of the child, the identification of him as a boy, the king threw wide the doors to the bedroom of the queen and invited everyone to come to inspect the baby boy.
Because the child had difficulty in taking in milk, a membrane under his tongue had to be cut so that he could nurse properly. He was given to a Mme. Montglat, a tall, thin, dominating woman to be his governess, and his doctor was Jean Heroard, who kept a meticulous journal noting every medication that the king took until the physician's death.
His future wife was decided upon before he was one years old as he was promised to marry the Spanish infanta. Early in life he expressed his fear of girls and of love. He did not want anything to do with either.
The little king grew up in an environment with all his half brothers and sisters around him. At one time there were nine children by five different mothers living at Saint Germaine. They were known throughout the land as le troupeau (the flock). The king (Henry IV) would come in the room with the Queen and would later return with Henrietta, his mistress. Louis XIII did not like either woman. It is said that when Henry took the young dauphin for a walk in the gardens of Fontainbleau, he introduced him to the Comptesse de Moret, " My dear lady, I have given this beautiful lady a child. He will be your brother." The dauphin blushed and stammered, "He is no brother of mine." After that he turned his attention to bagging birds, hunted them with a ferocity that made him perhaps one of the greatest killers of that royal sport.
Sadly, he was whipped by his governness and his father, and his mother when a child, even after signing documents. He was even asked when a child if he would be as ribald as his father, and he said coldly, "NO."
He loved to hunt, and after one session with his father at the favorite woods of Versailles, he was invited to dinner with his father. Shortly thereafter, Henry IV was attacked by a deranged man who stabbed him. Henry IV was taken back to the Louvre, carried to his bedroom on the second floor, and laid out on the bed. When he died, someone said the king is dead, and someone else responded," Not in France, the king is never dead," looked at the young prince, and said," Voila! There is the living king." He was only eight years old.
to be continued.
Rather than write out the entire article as I did with Rochefoucauld in the previous posts, I will paraphrase it and reduce it to a few pages in this blog. It is rather extensive and long.
Joseph Barry introduces the story of Louis XIII through the use of the hunting lodge which Louis XIII had built to accomodate himself and his hunters in the region of the Versailles. Louis loved to hunt, especially birds. Barry alleges that the hunting lodge is built from Louis's fear of women. This man had a very difficult rearing as a child, but he was born to Marie d'Medici, wife of Henry IV, at the Chateau du Fontainbleau in full view of his cousins, the Princes of the Blood, who were to bear witness to the birth of the child. Because questions of legitimacy could instigate civil wars, the witnessing of the birth of a child was a long term custom of French royals, not instituted by the Bourbons, but continued to be practiced by them. After the birth of the child, the identification of him as a boy, the king threw wide the doors to the bedroom of the queen and invited everyone to come to inspect the baby boy.
Because the child had difficulty in taking in milk, a membrane under his tongue had to be cut so that he could nurse properly. He was given to a Mme. Montglat, a tall, thin, dominating woman to be his governess, and his doctor was Jean Heroard, who kept a meticulous journal noting every medication that the king took until the physician's death.
His future wife was decided upon before he was one years old as he was promised to marry the Spanish infanta. Early in life he expressed his fear of girls and of love. He did not want anything to do with either.
The little king grew up in an environment with all his half brothers and sisters around him. At one time there were nine children by five different mothers living at Saint Germaine. They were known throughout the land as le troupeau (the flock). The king (Henry IV) would come in the room with the Queen and would later return with Henrietta, his mistress. Louis XIII did not like either woman. It is said that when Henry took the young dauphin for a walk in the gardens of Fontainbleau, he introduced him to the Comptesse de Moret, " My dear lady, I have given this beautiful lady a child. He will be your brother." The dauphin blushed and stammered, "He is no brother of mine." After that he turned his attention to bagging birds, hunted them with a ferocity that made him perhaps one of the greatest killers of that royal sport.
Sadly, he was whipped by his governness and his father, and his mother when a child, even after signing documents. He was even asked when a child if he would be as ribald as his father, and he said coldly, "NO."
He loved to hunt, and after one session with his father at the favorite woods of Versailles, he was invited to dinner with his father. Shortly thereafter, Henry IV was attacked by a deranged man who stabbed him. Henry IV was taken back to the Louvre, carried to his bedroom on the second floor, and laid out on the bed. When he died, someone said the king is dead, and someone else responded," Not in France, the king is never dead," looked at the young prince, and said," Voila! There is the living king." He was only eight years old.
to be continued.
Sunday, October 3, 2010
Bishop's description of King Louis XIII and Anne of Austria
When that everlasting war, which we call the Thirty Years War, fell into a lull, Francois and his bride made their court in Paris. The King, Louis XIII, was a poor creature, with a hundred valet's virtues, people said, and not a single master's virtue. He left all the kigndom's business to his mighty minister, Cardinal Richelieu. His own business, to get the queen a son, he postponed until twenty-two years after his marriage.
The queen was Anne of Austria, daughter of Philip III, king of Spain. She was of her husband's age, and twelve years older than our Francois. She was tall, very white and blonde, full-figured and full-breasted, and had beautiful hands of which she was very proud. Her inseparable companon was the Duchesse de Chevreuse. The Duchesse possessed "a powerful beauty", records Cardinal Richelieu, who wooed her in vain.
Others were more fortunate, at least in a way. She was forever organizing conspiracies against the government, with her lovers as leaders. The conspiracies were always discovered and the lovers either jailed or executed. People compared her to the horse of Sejus, which carried all its riders to disaster.
Francois adored amd pitied the lovely, neglected queen. He was admitted to her intimacy and (it is universally presumed) to the alarming favors of the Duchesse de Chevreuse. He made dizzy plans to abduct the queen, to carry her off to Belgium. He was involved in the machinations of the Duchesse. When she was banished to a chateau in Touraine, he served as courier between her and the queen, bearing innocent-looking letter with treason between the lines in invisible ink.
It was arranged, during a certain crisis, that the queen should warn Mme. de Chevreuse if an order were issued for her imprisonment. If the queen should succeed in allaying suspicion, she would send her friend a Book of Hours bound in green. But if all were lost, she would send a red-bound book, and Mme de Chevreuse must immediately flee the kingdom.
At the height of the crisis the queen was rudely interrogated by Richelieu, but she faced down her inquisitor and kept her friend's secrets intact. She ordered a faithful maid of honor to send the Duchesse a Book of Hours symbolically bound. Green, stay quiet; Red, escape. But wait a bit; was it not the other way round? Repeat it a dozen times and the words become a colored blur. At any rate the queen or the maid of honor or Mme de Chevreuse made a mistake, and the recipient of the message took it to be: Flee for your life!
The Duchesse rubbed her face with soot and brick dust, donned a blonde male wig and a musketeer's jacket, breeches, and jack boots, and set forth with two menservants for the Spanish border. They galloped a hundred miles in twelve hours, to Ruffec, between Potiers and Angouleme. The horses were done in, and the Duchesse's tender flesh, unused to the chafe of breeches, bloodied the saddle.
Francois was in his chateau at Verteuil, only three miles from Ruffec. When he received the message that the Duchesse was at hand, his first impulse was to go fetch her and conduct her way into Spain himself, but he thought better of it and sent her horses and a carriage with a manservant to take her safely over the Pyrenees into Spain. Unfortunately, she learned that it would have been better to stay at home.
This experience taught Rochefoucaul a lesson in prudence. Richelieu died in December, 1642, and the king five months later. The queen began to rule as regent for her four year old son, Louis XIV.
It tells me the courage of Anne of Austria to help her friend as well as her standing up to the interrogation of the Cardinal who was so insistent upon her confessing to him a secret.
It is fascinating to me to realize that Rochefoucauld is so sympathetic to the Queen.
Since so many are so dubious of the birhright of the young prince, would suspicion ever have fallen upon Rochefoucauld? I wonder.
The queen was Anne of Austria, daughter of Philip III, king of Spain. She was of her husband's age, and twelve years older than our Francois. She was tall, very white and blonde, full-figured and full-breasted, and had beautiful hands of which she was very proud. Her inseparable companon was the Duchesse de Chevreuse. The Duchesse possessed "a powerful beauty", records Cardinal Richelieu, who wooed her in vain.
Others were more fortunate, at least in a way. She was forever organizing conspiracies against the government, with her lovers as leaders. The conspiracies were always discovered and the lovers either jailed or executed. People compared her to the horse of Sejus, which carried all its riders to disaster.
Francois adored amd pitied the lovely, neglected queen. He was admitted to her intimacy and (it is universally presumed) to the alarming favors of the Duchesse de Chevreuse. He made dizzy plans to abduct the queen, to carry her off to Belgium. He was involved in the machinations of the Duchesse. When she was banished to a chateau in Touraine, he served as courier between her and the queen, bearing innocent-looking letter with treason between the lines in invisible ink.
It was arranged, during a certain crisis, that the queen should warn Mme. de Chevreuse if an order were issued for her imprisonment. If the queen should succeed in allaying suspicion, she would send her friend a Book of Hours bound in green. But if all were lost, she would send a red-bound book, and Mme de Chevreuse must immediately flee the kingdom.
At the height of the crisis the queen was rudely interrogated by Richelieu, but she faced down her inquisitor and kept her friend's secrets intact. She ordered a faithful maid of honor to send the Duchesse a Book of Hours symbolically bound. Green, stay quiet; Red, escape. But wait a bit; was it not the other way round? Repeat it a dozen times and the words become a colored blur. At any rate the queen or the maid of honor or Mme de Chevreuse made a mistake, and the recipient of the message took it to be: Flee for your life!
The Duchesse rubbed her face with soot and brick dust, donned a blonde male wig and a musketeer's jacket, breeches, and jack boots, and set forth with two menservants for the Spanish border. They galloped a hundred miles in twelve hours, to Ruffec, between Potiers and Angouleme. The horses were done in, and the Duchesse's tender flesh, unused to the chafe of breeches, bloodied the saddle.
Francois was in his chateau at Verteuil, only three miles from Ruffec. When he received the message that the Duchesse was at hand, his first impulse was to go fetch her and conduct her way into Spain himself, but he thought better of it and sent her horses and a carriage with a manservant to take her safely over the Pyrenees into Spain. Unfortunately, she learned that it would have been better to stay at home.
This experience taught Rochefoucaul a lesson in prudence. Richelieu died in December, 1642, and the king five months later. The queen began to rule as regent for her four year old son, Louis XIV.
It tells me the courage of Anne of Austria to help her friend as well as her standing up to the interrogation of the Cardinal who was so insistent upon her confessing to him a secret.
It is fascinating to me to realize that Rochefoucauld is so sympathetic to the Queen.
Since so many are so dubious of the birhright of the young prince, would suspicion ever have fallen upon Rochefoucauld? I wonder.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)