Talk:Madame du Barry

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Madame du Barry article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Biography: Royalty and Nobility

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility.

France Low‑importance

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sexology and sexuality: Sex work Mid‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Sex work task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Women's History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Absolute influence?

Q: in the page on Marie Antoinette, it says her influence over Louis XV was "absolute", but here it says "limited", which is it? (moved from page)

She didn't have a lot of political power over Louis XV but when she decided about what to do with certain individuals, she was "absolute" in giving her opinion... like what she did to Duke de Choiseul. Lincher 14:19, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Either she was executed by stoning or by guillotine. Which was it?68.72.109.168 17:12, 14 March 2007 (UTC) Guillotine.Babyboy160 (talk) 23:45, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP Biography Rating

Due to a backlog it is no longer possible to give comment on ratings. Please put any comments/questions on my talk page. GDon4t0 20:30, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesan after 1774

It says she was courtesan after 1774. She did have affairs, but unless the men payed her, then she was not a prostitute, she simply had a love life. -85.226.45.121 (talk) 22:10, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

She was a kept woman. -208.87.248.162 (talk) 19:08, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesan means a woman of the royal Court. Your problem is your own misunderstanding of English.

Please do not publish my IP — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:44b8:4146:600:2119:fb6f:9fe9:d2f0 (talk) 19:43, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Posthumous portrait

How could one of her protraits by Élisabeth Vigée Le Brun could be posthumous if painted circa 1789? Mme du Barry was executed in 1793. Frania W. (talk) 13:37, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vigee-Lebrun started the unfinished portrait of du Barry prior to the Revolution; Vigee-Lebrun was one of the first emigres to leave France and only finished the painting long after du Barry was deceased. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.23.72.127 (talk) 20:40, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Treatment of Mme du Barry in article

Oceanblueeyes: The hidden comments about which you are getting upset are mine, with my signature *FW* for Frania Wisniewska, which you could have guessed by going back to the date when comments were inserted. May I point out to you that hidden comments within text are not *accusations of lies* (please find one instance where I accused you of lying), they are addressed as a point of discussion to the editor who wrote the contested part. That's what Wikipedia is all about. The fact that you may have read hundreds of books on one subject does not mean that everyone will agree that you know more about that subject than anyone else. There may be books you have not read. For instance, have you read memoirs in French written by individuals who personally knew Mme du Barry? If you have not, you should, because this would make you realise that, depending on whether they liked her or not, the authors of these memoirs either praised her or thrashed her (the duc de Choiseul, for instance, who could not stand her because he had tried to have his own sister become official mistress to Louis XV, so you can imagine what he wrote about Mme du B!). Some authors and libellists did not treat her any better than was treated Marie Antoinette, with similar accusations of both women being whores, which, as the article stands, gives the impression that it is what Mme du Barry was, i.e. a modern call girl. Frania W. (talk) 13:38, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Baptism registration

Translation of birth registration signed by the curate of Vaucouleurs and Jeanne Bécu's godparents, Joseph Demange and Jeanne Birabin, should suffice to end the mini edit war RE her real first name as given at time of her birth.

Following is text of footnote n° 1 added this date to article:

"***Translation of Jeanne Bécu's baptism registration: *Jeanne* Bécu, natural daughter of Anne Bécu, surnamed Quantigny, was born on the nineteenth of August, seventeen-hundred-and-forty-three, and was baptised the same day, having for godfather Joseph Demange and for godmother Jeanne Birabin, who have signed with us. (signed by) L. Gahon, curate of Vaucouleurs. Joseph Demange, Jeanne Birabin., in A King's favourite, Madame du Barry, and her times from hitherto unpublished documents by Claude Saint-André with an introduction by Pierre de Nolhac and 17 illustrations, New York, Mc Bride, Nast & Company, 1915, p. 3 (a translation from the French publication by Tallandier, Paris, 1909.)***

Frania W. (talk) 18:27, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Should apocryphal work be given the status of reliable source? The Memoirs of the Comtesse du Barry; with minute details of her entire career as favorite of Louis XV by baron Étienne Léon de Lamothe-Langon are apocryphal. On the subject, please see http://www.hist.cam.ac.uk/academic_staff/working-papers/2007-2008/WP02_08.pdf, which has the advantage of being written in English, unless one wants to read Les supercheries littéraires dévoilées by Joseph Marie Quérard, in French.

This article on Jeanne Bécu, comtesse du Barry, is mostly based on 18th century libelles printed outside of France, in London & Amsterdam, and used in such literary deceptions (= supercheries) by writers of money-making sensational novels, not by historians.

While the article on the comtesse du Barry in English Wikipedia is based heavily on the sexual life of mother & daughter, making prostitutes of both of them (RE 18th century libelles), same article on French Wikipedia gives a much different view on the life of Jeanne Bécu.

Frania W. (talk) 16:10, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think I am seconding the above.

.

For example, in one section, Haslip is cited again and again as the only source, for allegations which provide a particular moral view and attempt to claim as fact things which seem highly unlikely to be able to be established as such.

.

A diversity of sources, and more primary sources should be seen in encyclopaedic work, and where claims are not well founded, as much should be admitted inline ; if inclusion of such text cannot be justified to the reader, eg on basis of current widespread interest in speculative claims, then this sort of matter is omitted. Have you ever read, eg a page of Encyclopaedia Brittanica? Have a look please.

.

Attribution is not always satisfied by a bibliography, at times you should attribute contendable claims in the primary text, and when this begins to appear cumbersome or results in repetition, that may be a clue that either a revolution in understanding is underway (needs explaining, probably a whole article of its own) or you found some bs.

.

Please do not publish my IP — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:44b8:4146:600:2119:fb6f:9fe9:d2f0 (talk) 19:08, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy on footnotes

Footnote inserted by one editor should not be added to by another editor as it removes the sense of the original footnote. If additional information needs to be given by another editor, then create a new footnote. Frania W. (talk) 22:59, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alledged Irrelevance

I feel that the section marked as "of questionable pertinence" to the article contributes a lot to understanding the character and position of Dubarry in her time and place. Her history has great social interest. -208.87.248.162 (talk) 19:07, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, but more generally, the entire article should be condensed, omitting or summarising any contentious and trivial elements. It is enough to point to external sources who examine those things in detail, as it seems many of the purported facts here are of subtle import or require detailed evaluation of subtleties which are beyond the ken of a general reader. Encyclopaediae are for general readers, not specialist academic debate, nor for drooling over sensationalist gossip. Please do not publish my IP — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:44b8:4146:600:2119:fb6f:9fe9:d2f0 (talk) 19:53, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Madame du Barry/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Many years ago at Catering College, I recall being informed that Madame du Barry inspired the 'haute cuisine' dish - 'Choufleur du Barry' - and believe the dish is included within 'Le repertoire De la Cuisine' by L Saulnier - the bible of 'haute cuisine'. Supposedly, Madame du Barry started the fasion of wearing tall white 'wigs' as a coutesan and 'Choufleur (caulifower) du Barry' is culinary tribute in memory of this style of wig.

Paul Barlow.

89.241.3.88 17:08, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 17:08, 27 July 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 22:46, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Image change

I think we should change the image on this page - I know it’s not frequently used in works about du Barry and the outfit is very similar to Marie Antoinette’s in another le Brun portrait, so I’m worried it would confuse people. Dancingtudorqueen (talk) 04:05, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note

I have chosen to publish the IP of the unsigned editor above because it is important to know when and by whom a Wikipedia edit was made (especially an unsigned comment) and Wikipedia is more important than just one person. If the IP editor really wanted their IP address hidden, they could have created an account. Graham87 (talk) 05:48, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]