Did Marie Antionette deserve to be killed in the French revolution?

Question

I wouldnt regard the royal family as totally innocent, but I do aggree that no one deserved to be killed.

Answer 1

No, I don't think that she should have been executed. Furthermore, I feel even more strongly that her children should not have been executed.
The French were leaning heavily toward a limited monarchy, when suddenly the King and Queen and Princes fled captivity trying to make their way to Austria (the Queen's brother was the Emperor). Certainly had they made it, they would have been saved by the Emperor and they would have been aided militarily and financially toward retaking the French crown. Unfortunately the King was too bad a bungler and they were recaptured.
This attempt to flee, tied in with the fear that the Austrian Empire would aid the deposed monarchs moved the people toward 'Democracy'.
What do you do with them then? If you leave them alive, do they try to escape and succeed? rescued by the Austrians? If you execute them do you send a message to Austria (leave us alone)? or do they (Austria) retaliate? It was a big gamble for the Revolutionaries.
My how things might have been different, if for the fate of a family of four!

Answer 2

No, I don't think so. She was a totally tragic figure. The ironic thing here is that if the king of France had not invested so heavily in the War of Independence to help the Colonists fight England, the Colonists never would have had the funding to defeat England. The USA literally owes its very existence to the King of France. Also, if France had stayed out of the situation in the Colonies, the French government most likely would not have used up enough money to make the French populace believe that Marie Antoinette was squandering away the country's treasury. (This is conjecture, of course.)

Answer 3

No, I don't think she was that evil; they could have just taken most of her wealth, and she could have raised her children in peace. Even her husband King Louis XVI wasn't so evil. I am not saying that they were good rulers, though. But they had no choice about being put into "power," and the system was deeply flawed.
That said, it was the usual thing to execute deposed rulers.
But beyond that, the French Revolution produced a frenzy of bloodshed, guillotining many innocent people, including scientist Antoine Lavoisier, the father of modern chemistry.

Answer 4

I don't think she was really guilty of anything beyond not caring about her people, or at least not paying attention to what was happening to them. The French thought she was a traitor, though. She was an Austrian princess, and they had been at war with Austria, so any letter she sent to her brother, the king, was believed to contain information to help the Austrians. Her lavish spending at a time when most Frenchmen were starving was enough to drive the mob to kill her, but I'm sure that her Austrian background didn't help, either.

Answer 5

This is the simplest version: She was accused of many things, most of which were probably not true. These things included: - hosting orgies in Versailles - sending lots of France's treasury money to Austria - plotting to kill the Duke of Orléans - declaring her son to be the new king of France - orchestrating the massacre of the Swiss Guards in 1792 - and most seriously, she was accused of sexually abused her son. She vehemently denied this and it is generally believed to be untrue. In reality, it didn't matter much what she said in the trial to defend herself, because the outcome of the trial had been pre-determined by the Committee of Public Safety, and she was declared guilty of treason. (Treason is basically a betrayal of your country - either purposely doing something to hurt your country, or doing something that helps your enemy.) She was executed on the same day as the verdict was read, two and a half weeks before her thirty-eighth birthday.

Answer 6

If you read the history on her, or visit Versailles in France (I was there last summer), you learn that she really was just a young, ignorant girl who had no idea of the reality of the harsh life of the "common folk" who later killed her. In fact, she had a "farm" on the Versaille grounds where she would dress up like a villager and "tend" to animals and gardens. To her, though, it was just a fantasy, a silly game - she was out of touch with the truth of the situation.

Remember, though, she never knew anything else or any other life. She was young, rich, and beautiful, and had the world handed to her on a silver platter. She married when she was 14 (I believe), just a child, and became queen just five years later! But if you read more into her life, you can see how fragile, lonely, and out of touch she was:

"On May 7, as a symbolic act of loyalty, Maria Antonia was required to leave her Austrian attire, possessions, servants, and friends behind. After lengthy negotiations, she was allowed to keep her dog, a Shih Tzu named Schnitzy. The 14-year old was stripped of her nationality and her clothes before the entire Austrian delegation that was present, causing her to break down and cry."

"Marie Antoinette loathed the public spectacle complaining bitterly to her mother, 'I put on my rouge and wash my hands in front of the whole world!'"

"Homesick and melancholic, Marie Antoinette especially missed the companionship she had enjoyed with her sister, Maria Carolina."

"Marie Antoinette's first child was born at Versailles on December 19, 1778. She was forced to endure the humiliation of a public birth in her bedchamber, in front of hundreds of courtiers. The queen actually passed out through a combination of embarrassment and pain. It was the last time such a ritual was permitted; Marie Antoinette refused to give birth in public ever again."

History now shows that tales of her wealth and frivolessness were greatly exaggerated, and that she did spend a lot of money as a young girl (having no idea of the value of money) but it diminished as she became a mother and grew more mature:

"Louis XVI's coronation took place at Reims during the height of a bread shortage in Paris. This is the context in which Marie Antoinette is incorrectly quoted as joking, 'If they have no bread, then let them eat cake!' There is no evidence that this phrase was ever uttered by Marie Antoinette.

"As she grew older, Marie Antoinette became much less extravagant. She was devoted to her children, and she was very involved in taking care of them. She was also much more involved in charity work, although she had always been very generous."

If you read, for example, the entire Wikipedia article from which the above quotes were pulled, you see a much maligned women who truly was put to death due to misunderstandings and people who were caught up in the revolution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Antoinette

Answer 7

absolutely not. the french revolution was just an excuse for blood thirsty anti social elements to put innocent royalty to death.

marie antoinette did not deserve to get killed in such a manner. even without considering that she was a woman, the mob killed the lady, thus writing a very bloody chapter in european history.

Answer 8

No one "deserved" to be killed but she was completely out of touch with the common folk of France and paid for her ignorance.

Answer 9

back then in those days they was a different way of thinking than there is now. now we aren't as harsh as they were. i don't believe she should have been killed. they should have thrown her out of the palace and forced her to live a poor penniless life. same for her children.

Answer 10

YES, Certainly, because she said "Let them eat cake.", and then she didn't bring any!!! She should have brought enough cake for everyone and ice cream would have been a good idea.