The Sun King : Louis Fourteenth At Versailles (1966) - Plot & Excerpts
After reading two of Nancy Mitford’s historical biographies, I can say that I have at the very least learned exactly who Nancy likes to invite to her parties. Ladies should be elegant, witty, memorable, beautiful if at all possible, and at the very least aware that one must dress if not. They should be wise in the ways of men, conform to religious standards only as much as necessary to not end up on the front page, and above all be disinclined to fall into the vapors. Men are required to be elegant, witty, memorable, and handsome if at all possible, or dressed in a way that falls in to some sort of amusing stereotype if not (the crusty sailor, the coarse soldier, the court jester). Morality is unnecessary for either sex, however, the ability to both command a drawing room and a country (or a lover) is highly prized. Nancy Mitford likes clever managers of people and situations. She gives the approving nod to whichever characters can carry off their part with style and make the least trouble for everyone while still doing quite well for themselves. It is possible to tell which characters she is truly attached to because she allows them to have emotion and for people around them to properly grieve at their passing, whereas unworthy characters get “quite what they deserve."This makes her treatment of Louis somewhat ambiguous. It is easy to tell that she would like to approve of him. He is, after all, the creator of that shining world of Versailles, which Nancy clearly considers to be the closest thing the nobility have ever created to heaven. She lovingly traces its origins through to its full flowering late in his reign, sometimes indeed giving the impression that if the building had had more love affairs and fought more wars, she would have written a history of the walls of Versailles itself. But Nancy’s interest is for “personalities,” as her stand-in character in Love in a Cold Climate always said. Thus Louis “l’etat c’est moi,” is the closest thing she can come to as a subject. This leads her to make the best case for him she can. His brilliance in creating Versailles is emphasized. The system required nobles to be at court and to bankrupt themselves trying to dress appropriately and kept everyone so busy with a constant round of parties that they could never look up to realize that they were not exercising any real power at all. Those few who did look up were sold offices at exorbitant prices, offices which were still dependent on the king and centered on the court. His mastery of etiquette, amazing self-control in all situations, and his ability to love strongly in select cases are all praised and described in detail. Louis is also defended against charges that he remained terrified of his subjects all of his life because of the Fronde (though I think there is an argument to be made that that is why he wanted all his nobles where he could see them at Versailles). She likewise spends time discrediting paintings which make him look “quite Jewish” (which seems to mean a big nose and wrinkled all over), telling of busts and descriptions that make him sound rather handsome when young. There’s a long section at the end detailing the trials of the War of the Spanish Succession and Louis’ courage in fighting on when everything seemed to be against him. She clearly approves of Phillip V enough to think that it was worth fighting for his throne.The problem is that there are just too many factors that she doesn’t like. She faults Louis for not being witty enough. She faults his choice of boring companions at many points in his life. She does not like the children he chooses to love (especially the unworthy Duc du Maine), and she hates two out of his three principal mistresses. She tells stories of his cruelty (his lack of sympathy for any kind of illness is a standout example. He made many ill people travel when they were in no condition to. This included heavily pregnant women who he made travel with the court late in their term. A few lost their babies in the process), his hardness, and his frightening demeanor (though you can tell she sort of secretly approves of that- kings are God’s representatives after all). She can’t get over how stupid he is to keep stupid King James at his court and then shelter the Old Pretender after that, or his obsession with destroying Holland. She’s endlessly bored with his ventures into religion. It's telling the only joy she seems to take in that part of the story is the bits where Louis punishes courtiers he catches laughing in church. Princely authority asserted. Always hot.Yet despite these efforts to sketch out a Louis that can worthily hold the center, she never really focuses the camera on him for any length of time. As I mentioned, it is clear that Louis is the choice of subject by default. He is simply a pivot point and a story structure, providing beginning, middle, end, and the plot points that motivate the actions of others. Stella Tillyard (whose own work as a historian I adore), in her introduction to the book, points out that the biography is truly the story of Louis’ three principal mistresses, whose reigns separate out the stages of his life. Louise de la Valliere when he was young, Madame de Montespan in his prime, and Madame de Maintenon in his late middle age and twilight years. I think that this is true insofar as we spend much more time following these women and the atmosphere of the court that they create (Queens seem to never count in these biographies) than Louis himself. Again, though, the problem is she only likes one of them, Madame de Montespan. She addresses her by her first name, and highlights her period as the most amusing, fun-filled part of the King’s life. Yet again, though, even she disappoints her by falling from favor, consulting the dark arts, and then turning bitter and angry and, biggest crime of all, uninteresting, in the last years of her life. Louise is whiny and insipid, a stereotype of a wilting flower. Madame de Maintenon is the symbol of Louis turning to religion. You can tell Nancy sees this as the horridly boring part of his life which ruined all the fun of Versailles. (For illustration's sake, its worth pointing out that her ultimate salute of her beloved Pompadour is to declare that after her death "a great dullness" settled over Versailles.)I agree with Tillyard that Mitford sees the women as her way into this bit of history. However, I also think that unlike with La Pompadour, she could never latch onto someone’s story for long enough to create a sense of a coherent world. She had to jump from place to place and person to person to keep the stories she liked center stage. This created a very confusing narrative that skipped back and forth in time, that zigzagged back and forth across the court amongst crowds of indistinguishable duchesses and princesses. She set up too many obligations for herself. I think that is probably what I’m trying to say. She said this book is about Louis, so she has to do him. She’s clearly made the choice to focus on the mistresses, so now she’s got to fill out their story. She likes gossip and scandal, so she wants to tell us every juicy story she knows no matter where it leads. And in the end, let us not forget her commitment to her dream castle of Versailles and describing its odyssey. This ended up in a confused place where peoples’ narratives got really and fully fleshed out in one part of the book, only to have their deaths or later doings summed up in two sentences later (even Madame de Montespan got this treatment) as an afterthought. The king appears strongly at the beginning and disappears for long stretches, only poking his head in when necessary. The mistresses give place to the courtiers they fight with, and some fascinating B plot men (the Prince de Conti, the Grand Conde) fade into the background and then pop back up again at points when the story should not be about them.I think she would have done better to publish this as a collection of individual scandals from Versailles. The King didn't need to be here, for the most part. The supporting cast is large enough to have a story all their own, and they are clearly what fills in the background and makes Versailles the place that she loves. The King remains the constant, the story is how you revolve around him and work your way closer. But it is clear that Louis is far from her favorite thing about this time period. It is clear when we meet someone that she likes, and they are all over Versailles. But because of her obligations to the Sun King she can’t spend the time she would like to with them. I wish she’d just been honest about that and written a different book. As it is, this simply can’t compare to her biography of Pompadour. She deprived herself of the things she loved, which ruled Pompadour’s story, and gave herself a list of obligations instead. Page turning history, which is the only reason to read Mitford in preference to more scholarly efforts, is not made that way. I was by turns bored, unimpressed, all too fleetingly amused, and then confused, then the whole cycle started again. More Mitford charm in her study of Voltaire, I hope. That’s next.
This is not a history of France during the reign of Louis XIV, the Sun King. It is a history of the day-to-day life of the King and his court at Versailles. Which is interesting. But not really what I was looking for. It didn't feed my desire to understand history. If you are looking to understand all the intricate political maneuvering among the courtiers in France during the late 1600s and early 1700s--this is your book. I will share with you the two best (most interesting to me) antidotes from the book. 1. The labor and delivery of Louis XIV's grandson, Le Petit Dauphin (who died before his grandfather, leaving his son, the Sun King's great-grandson, to become Louis XV King of France--more on that below). So Maria Anna Victoria of Bavaria (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_An...) married the Sun King's son and become next in line to be Queen of France. She was ugly (odd brown splotches on her face and a massive hooked nose) and sickly and dull and did not fit in a the grand court at Versailles at all. "She was certainly very ugly and this was bad luck on her in a court where nearly all the women were beauties." (Remember this book was written by a woman.)But she did her duty and became pregnant at age 22. Her labor and delivery is one of the most amazing things I have ever read. Maria had previously had two miscarriages so a doctor was present to deliver the baby instead of a midwife. When she went into labor in the early morning hours, a festive party sprung up in the palace. The courtyard was illuminated and messages stood at the ready to take word throughout the kingdom. The room filled with all the most important people to watch the birth and more crowded the hall as close as they could get. It was August and a grilling heat wave was in progress. The labor was difficult and progressed slowly. At about lunchtime the relics (body parts) of the long dead St. Margaret were brought and shown to poor Maria laboring along as best she could. This was supposed to help speed things along, I guess. The King came and went, feeding Maria by his own hand food and wine at one point. Eventually he went to a State dinner. A special bed was brought in with hand-holds and foot pegs and Maria was transferred over. All the Ambassadors from all the nations in Europe were ushered into the room--it was important they could report first hand regarding the birth of a male heir to the throne should the boy every take the Crown, there would be no question of his legitimacy. The German-born Maria continued to labor with dozens of strange male eyes on her. The Sun King came back and stayed with her all night. The others came and went, in and out. Maria felt that she was about to die and thanked the King for his kindness to her, that she was sorry to leave him. All felt that she was fading fast, the labor too long. So they bled her. Twice. While she was continuing to labor hard. The King said that he would even be glad to see the baby be born a girl if Maria could live and the suffering end. This astounded all those present, girls were so little valued, being barred from the throne due to Salic law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salic_La...). All night long the labor continued, no sleep came for Maria. The bleedings continued periodically all night long. At dawn all were miserable and tired and Maria had been going for over 24 hours. She was on death's doorstep and a priest was called to give her last rites. Still no baby. Then it came. A baby boy. And heir (then second in line after his father, the Sun King's son). Crowds went wild. Shouts and cheers and church bells. A huge bon-fire in the courtyard was kindled with even furniture piled on for wood. The Sun King let them go, saying only "I hope they don't burn the house down". He was so happy and filled with joy. Le Grand Dauphin, son of Louis XIV, father of the baby, left straightway for a hunt and was seen no more that day. Maria, the Dauphine of France, had served her purpose and lay still suffering in her bed, seemingly forgotten by the Sun King and her husband. The doctor kept his head and had just the cure for her (thankfully not more bleedings). He had a large sheep brought into the room and had it flayed alive right in the birth room and wrapped Maria up in the bloody-fresh skin. "Naturally this cured her at once," says the author sarcastically. She only wanted to go to sleep, but the doctor thought this dangerous and forced her to stay awake for another 3-4 hours. Then her room was hermetically sealed up and Maria was forced to stay in bed, with the sheep skin around her, without even the light of a candle, in that terrible August heat wave, for another nine days. And you thought your birth experience was hard. Wow. Maria lived another 8 years, giving birth to two other children, dying at age 30 from unknown ailments (she was always sick apparently). 2. At the end of his life, The Sun King was dying slowly as a very old man. He had ascended to the throne at the age of 5 in 1643 and ruled France for 72 years and 110 days--the record for longest reign of all the monarchs in all of European history. As he was dying in 1715, his five-year-old great-grandson was brought in to him and sat upon his lap on the bed. There was the old King dying. The only King that anyone alive in France could remember. And because of the death of the le Grand Dauphin (the Sun King's son) and le Petit Dauphin (the Grandson of the birth story above), there was the next King, so young, with an unknown and difficult future ahead of him. They two stared into each other's eyes and the old King wished the child well. A poignant scene for sure. A few hours later, the little boy became Louis XV, Louis The Much Beloved. He would rule for until 1774, another 59 years. Together those two men on that bed, at the different ends of life, ruled on of the most powerful nations on Earth for 131 consecutive years. Amazing. They didn't care enough about the poor and downtrodden citizens of France and set a standard for high living that fostered resentment. Eventually the House of Bourbon would fall in a revolution of the people, in large part to their mistakes. But they ruled for a century and a third between the two of them, crossing paths only briefly there at Versailles. The tender meeting would have been quite a sight to behold.
What do You think about The Sun King : Louis Fourteenth At Versailles (1966)?
I liked this book, especially the set up! It's so smart: it starts with a brief biography of Louis XIV complete with all the dates you need to fall asleep, then the rest of the book fleshes out his life, the lives of the members of the Court and the French Royal Family without that “reading a text-book” feeling. More like a collections of anecdotes – right up my alley!My problem was just that: “all the members of the Court and the French Royal Family” - there are just TOO MANY PEOPLE!!!Although I was interested in the subject matter and really liked the quirky, gossipy tone of the narrative, I SUCK a remembering names. I am TERRIBLE at it!! This book was so jam-packed with so many people that by about ¾ of the way through I was completely lost. Too bad – my loss.
—Simone
Meh. Interesting factoids here and there. But it drives me nuts that the events written about in the book are not in chronological order. It's all over the place. And I'm not well versed in French history (pre or post French Revolution) although I do know some but the names and relations were a bit hard to follow at first. And I tried to take notes but then realized it doesn't make much of a difference in understanding how/why the events unfolded the way it did. Or maybe it does. I don't know. It's a fun read. Not very academic.
—B
Mitford's gossipy turn of phrase has been noted by other reviewers but I didn't find it too disruptive an influence on the reading experience overall. The Sun King is a fascinating little book about the life of Louis XIV and, more than that, of the enormous social, political and cultural organization that revolved around his person. I hesitate to call it a biography in doubt that the genre is suitable for a person who was so much more than an individual with a history. For King Louis was himself an institution, and any book about him is necessarily a depiction of the life of an entire culture.
—Kimmo
