The two best biographies on Marie Antoinette are 'Queen of France' by Caselot and 'Fatal Friendship' by Loomis. Fatal Friendship focuses mostly on the friendship between the Queen and Count Axel Fersen, the breathtaking escape attempt and their deaths. Loomis leaves it up to the reader to decide whether or not the two were actual physical lovers, but with the evidence presented, not only do I believe they were, but that Louis XVI knew, and didn't care.

The highlight of the book is the escape attempt though. As you read on and on at a harrowing pace, you almost believe they'll make it. But the stupid mistakes, lack of judgement, and time wasted sealed the fate of the royal family.

As we all know Marie Antoinette died on the guillotine, but do you know the violent death that Axel Fersen faced? Or the legend of the ring that was given to him by Marie?

An excellent, well written, and easy to follow book that made me fall in love with the Queen and see her not as a monster, but as a woman and a mother who despite trying her best, just couldn't make anything work out.

Once again Stanley Loomis takes us there- to the time of the Great French Revolution, and before, but this time to the side of Marie Antoinette and Louis XVI. Loomis, by pouring through old documents and by meticulous research, has an uncanny way of recreating the past in all its subtle details. This book shows how Marie Antoinette was vilified by her friends, some family members, and by her host country (France), and more significantly, how her spririt became more courageous and fortified as she endured extreme hardships unto her execution. Loomis retraces all the details of her and the deposed king's attempted escapes, from the flight to Varennes under the plan of Count Ferson, to the foiled plot to sneak the queen and her child out of prison. Loomis exposes the truth behind the queen's sequestered love affair with Count Ferson, and her own Austrian family's betrayal of her. Loomis does a fantastic job in showing us King Louis XVI as well- his kind nature in the face of his adversarys (which up to the end he refused to see as his enemies, but maintained that he "would not cause a drop of blood to spill from my subjects"), and his ultimate martyrdom by those he sought to understand. King Louis XVI should be given the accolades befitting a Saint. Loomis' creative command of vocabulary instills his writing with top-notch character descriptions and sometimes with more philosophical questions and ideas. But this book is not pedantic or just for the bookmarmish French history types, it is exceptionally entertaining and highly recommended. For another excellent book by Loomis, please read "Paris In the Terror"! You will not be disappointed with either of these!

Friends, do yourselves a favor and get this book if you're interested in an unbiased, accurate account of the relationship between the last queen of France and the handsome, (and rather conceited), Swedish count. Recently author Evelyn Farr has taken up the subject, under a title that leads one to believe she has uncovered new and startling information regarding the "star-crossed lovers": "Marie Antoinette and Count Fersen, the Untold Love Story". Spare yourselves the 40 odd bucks that this tissue of fantasy and conjecture will set you back. I have posted a review of Farr's book accordingly, which you may consult for further details. Suffice it to say, Loomis does the job expected of a fine historian...he writes with a passion for his subject without sacrificing accuracy. Loomis has no problems sharing his personal opinions regarding the subject matter, but he has the decency to claim them solely as his own. For an intimate sketch of the Terror and its effects on leading figures of the Revolution, you may also want to check out his "Paris in the Terror". A delight to read...but then, I expect nothing less of Loomis.

The two best biographies on Marie Antoinette are 'Queen of France' by Caselot and 'Fatal Friendship' by Loomis.

Fatal Friendship focuses mostly on the friendship between the Queen and Count Axel Fersen, the breathtaking escape attempt and their deaths. Loomis leaves it up to the reader to decide whether or not the two were actual physical lovers, but with the evidence presented, not only do I believe they were, but that Louis XVI knew, and didn't care.

The highlight of the book is the escape attempt though. As you read on and on at a harrowing pace, you almost believe they'll make it. But the stupid mistakes, lack of judgement, and time wasted sealed the fate of the royal family.

As we all know Marie Antoinette died on the guillotine, but do you know the violent death that Axel Fersen faced? Or the legend of the ring that was given to him by Marie?

An excellent, well written, and easy to follow book that made me fall in love with the Queen and see her not as a monster, but as a woman and a mother who despite trying her best, just couldn't make anything work out.

If one is writing fiction, then one can freely tamper with the FACTS, BUT IF ONE IS writing history, or attempting to write history, it is an essential duty to remain honest. Instead, Loomis is dishonest, invents from whole cloth and deliberately alters quotations from source to make it appear to say the opposite of what they really are saying. As such, this book should be held up as an example of dishonest writing.

It's been perhaps 25 years since I first read "Paris in the Terror". I found it gripping and revelatory: it certainly caused me to make a fresh assessment of the 'revolutionary' movements of the Sixties (of which I was a part), and I read it a number of times before it moved on. As a cautionary tale on the uncertain fruits of good intentions, it is priceless - and it's a ripping yarn, to boot. Is it 'reputable' history? How would I know?

Certainly, there seems to be some hostility toward Loomis' focus on the human element in creating & sustaining the Reign of Terror, though the reasons for this are obscure at best. It could be as simple as this: in focusing on the role of human nature in human events, Loomis fails to genuflect before the altar of pop-socialist "realismus", preferring to view history not as a Titanic clash of impersonal forces but as the interlocking sum of the individual passions, choices, and shortcomings of real people struggling with real dilemmas.

No-one should be surprised that this approach finds no favor with the professional academics of today, whose priority is the maintenance of their paychecks & their access to nubile females. Professional academic history basically occupies two camps: the "orthodox" view of the French Revolution holds substantially to the pop-socialist view of vast socio-economic forces sweeping away the oppressive debris of feudalism - and in the best Red-Guard tradition, views the excesses of the Terror as a regrettable side-effect of a healthy process of social evolution; the "revisionist" view (as seen by the "orthodox" camp) contends that - given the excesses of revolutionary zeal - the 'Ancien Regime' was the lesser evil.

Loomis, IMO, thinks for himself, and carves a middle way through the middens, and comes to the conclusion that good intentions are not sufficient to avoid the descent into hell. In the polarised post-9/11 atmosphere, this is a cautionary tale we sorely need. Consequently, real people could gain real profit from reading this book. And if the reader must read between the lines, well, that's the point of education, isn't it?

I don't pretend to be a "scholar", since I'm still breathing, and I certainly don't buy into the myth of objectivity; however, I am intelligent, well-read, widely experienced, and I have no partisan axe to grind. As I said above, my comments on "Paris in the Terror" are based on my recollection of multiple readings many years ago. I got here by way of wanting to find a copy so I can read it again. I think it's a shame this very thought-provoking book is out of print.

I am not sure why this book has generated the hostility and negative sandblasting of its content. It is a highly readable book and seems to me to get closer to the truth of what was actually going on than some over-anecdoted meander that has no point of view and presents nothing as cogent food for thought. Here's an idea for all would be critcs, read another book on the same subject and see if it even comes close to evoking the sounds of smells of revolutionary France as this one does. This work does an excellent job at describing the heated passions of the day and the altruistic hopes of the revolutionists. Yes, Loomis has prejudices, but they are enjoyable to read from an author who cares about his subject deeply. Much better than some dry, withered academic prose which comes nowhere near to having one truly experience the passions and grandeur of the event.