| Question Home |
Position:Home>History> Was Marie Antoinette merely a scapegoat for frances problems?Question: Was Marie Antoinette merely a scapegoat for frances problems!? was marie antoinette merely a symbol and represenation of french aristocratic decadence of which the people grew tired of!? and therefore did she become the perfect scapegoat and person to blame for the problems in France!? i need examplesWww@QuestionHome@Com
Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: Historians now believe that she was indeed a scapegoat!. In many ways she was actually trying to help the people!. She was an easy target because she was Austrian!. The marrage was supposed to bring a new era of peace and friendship, instead it just put a very young girl in a very difficult position, in a royal court, that hated anything Austrian!. The fact that she didn't produce an heir for so long (the fault for this being the king not Marie Antionette) did not help her popularityWww@QuestionHome@Com yes and no!. yes, since she was the outsider (being austrian by birth and never ingratiated herself into french people's hearts - she was always the king's WIFE! that austian woman! look, the whole family and royalty/monarchy was at risk!. even if he had married, unlikely, a french noble woman, she too would've gotten it in the end!. it was years of royal abuse and king louis the 16th along with wife and royal court that just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time!. somethings are just meant to happen and this was just another example of too little and way too late! something, however, to ponder: would we be talking about her if she lived to a ripe old age, head in place!? she's become immortal and one of the world's most talked-about women in history!. i think that's something she wouldn't have minded even if it cost her her bonnet (so to speak!)!.Www@QuestionHome@Com More-or-less, yes!. They didn't like that this one young Austrian girl came and married into their monarchy!. It also didn't help that she wasn't producing a child for them, either!. She WAS an extravagent spender, that is true, but that is not to say that she was the sole cause of any sort of English debt!. Her husband, dare I say it, also helped!. Quite often, as well, the public would form up some sort of lie about her!. "Let them eat cake"!? Most historians now say that they don't think she actually said this!. I hope that this has helped!! Hayley!. : )Www@QuestionHome@Com Yes!. She hadn't started the system of monarchy, she wasn't in charge of anything--plus, she wasn't French, so it was easy to blame her!. She wasn't evil; she was simply a product of her time and her station in life!.Www@QuestionHome@Com No!. France had major problems already!. Just look at how many forms of government they had over a few short decades!. Besides, she was spying for the Austrians, which doesn't exactly leave her out of the political realm!.Www@QuestionHome@Com Simply put, yes!. They said she said things she didn't, like "Let them eat cake!." Someone can go more into depth i'm sure, but in my opinion she was a scapegoat!.Www@QuestionHome@Com To answer any misdeeds some scape gots are needed !.She was made like that a scape goat!.Www@QuestionHome@Com |