How was Marie Antoinette a bad ruler and unfair towards her people ?

Question

I have to write a 3-5 page research paper on that and i have pretty much nothing, and im pretty nervous. Its due on monday, so any facts/tidbits of knowledge you kind people would like to bestow upon me would be amazing :D :D :D

thank you !!

Answer 1

This is just my opinion but i don't think that Marie Antoinette was a bad ruler.

Answer 2

It wasn't that he was a bad ruler, she was just too young to take on that kind of responsibility, (like most royalty back then). She wasn't guided very well. Her mom was a bit of a tyrant with all her children. She wanted greatness from all of thm and didn['t care about their well being or their happiness. Marie was sent to a foreign country at around 15. She was very bored most of the time and started spending money like crazy. Between jewels, clothes, and hair, she put on plays with a few of her close courtiers and spend lots of money on building elaborate sets. It wouldn't have been a huge problem in a financially secure kingdom, but France was not at the time. The people (especially the working class) were getting fed up as they watched the price of bread soar higher and higher. Most people were starving and they had to watch this queen, who wasn't very friendly to them (i just don't think she was much of a people person) spend all this money all the time while they starved. Watching the royalty have fun and spend while they worked so hard and stll didn't make enough money to survive was depressing and that's what started the revelution. The people wanted lower prices and they wanted some say in the government. I believe if her and King Louis XVI were more for the people and showed them that they cared about them things never would have gotten as far as they did. Not trying to be negative, or disrespectful, but picture Paris Hilton (the way she is now) as president of a very poor country. She might be a nice person, but she's very spoiled and selfish and she would probably be overthrown. Good luck with your project.

Answer 3

She never actually said "Let them eat cake" - so don't put that in your report. She was too self absorbed and didn't care about the people. While they were starving she was spending money on the latest ridiculous hairstyles and fashions. In my opinion, she wasn't so much a bad ruler as she was just completly oblivious. And as much as the revolutionaries liked to think, her expensive habits did not deplete the national treasury. If she had stopped they'd have some more money, but they'd still be deeply in debt from their involvement in the American Revolution and the Seven Years' War.

A lot of the French people saw her as weak, too, because she wouldn't produce an heir until something like 7 years after the marriage. Turns out it was because of a defect Louis had that made arousal painful, and it all got sorted out, but even after she had kids people still saw her as the woman who couldn't produce an heir.

And to correct what someone said: Yes, she was Austrian. She was the daughter of Maria Theresa and was known as the "Austrian *****" to underground writers, but that really had nothing to do with by she was so stupid and oblivious. She had lived in France for a long time before the revolution. She was just general oblivious - it had nothing to do with her nationality.

Answer 4

Both Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette were not fit to rule. Not because they were bad, they were just stupid. The fact is that they behave like other rulers of their day. The only difference is that they got the blame, for everything that went wrong in France. Many of the rumors that exist to this day (spread by revolutionaries) that caused their downfall were in fact not true.

Answer 5

No, she wasn't "undesirable," and he or she wasn't responsible of an excellent style of the flaws she became into accused of, yet she wasn't very bright and did no longer comprehend that her extravagance performed very badly in France. in spite of the incontrovertible fact that, whether she had executed so, historic events have been overtaking her, and it relatively is particularly achievable -- probable, in actuality -- that she could have lost her existence interior the phobia besides. There could have been no steps she could have taken to save herself. As for components, i admire Antonia Fraser's biography of Marie Antoinette, which became into revealed approximately 10 years in the past.

Answer 6

I don't think she was a bad ruler, she just didn't rule!
Plus she is a jewelry monger, and cared for nothing aside from looking pretty.
There are actually some people comparing her with Cleopatra, gosh it's a downright insult. Cleopatra had done and been more than this lazy Queen had!

Answer 7

She was naive and stupid.

All she knew was what she had been brought up around, affluence. Riches and intrigue. She knew nothing of the poor and wasn't interested. In other words, a rich, self-absorbed teenager.

Answer 8

to put it simply, she was too dumb to be a ruler. She was a little girl, brought up to be pretty and nothing more. The quote 'let them eat cake' was said because she didn't understand why they were demanding bread. She thought that they could have just eaten cake...but peasants can't afford it!

Answer 9

She wasn't! She was to young to be a queen, to young to rule a nation. A lot of things were going on, and not all of them can be blamed on Marie. Go to Wikipedia and look up your stuff there, it will help you, and there is a lot of information.

Answer 10

No. She was really Austrian and had no idea what was going on around her. In other words, she was ignorant of the living conditions of the French people