- Museum number
- 1958,1006.2758
- Title
- Object: Monsieur Vaucher: Monsieur Loque Bijoutier
- Description
-
Double portrait of Vaucher and Loque in two ovals facing each other. 1780s
Manière de lavis (aquatint)
- Dimensions
-
Height: 246 millimetres
-
Width: 180 millimetres (sheet)
- $Inscriptions
-
-
- Curator's comments
- Visual Analysis by Pauline Wholey 2019
DOUBLE PORTAIT OF VAUCHER AND LOQUE
This double portrait originates from the memoirs of Vaucher & Loque and their accusation against Bette d'Etienville and Baron de Fages-Chaulnes during the 'Affair of the Diamond Necklace.' In this memoir, they accuse Bette d'Etienville and Baron de Fages-Chaulnes of not settling the massive debt they owe them for all the wedding jewellery commissioned by the Baron. On the left side of the title page, this printed double portrait memorialises and creates a sense of monumentality to their defence, despite its lack of contribution in the jurisdiction made upon the accused.
Background: (1784-1785) This 'Affair of the Diamond Necklace,' initially accused Queen Marie Antoinette of participating in a crime to deceive the crown jewellers in acquiring a diamond necklace of 1,600,000 livres. However, the mission was actually prompted by Countess de la Motte who deceived everyone into believing that the necklace was for the Queen. The necklace was originally commissioned for the mistress of Louis XV, Madame du Barry. It had been presented to Marie Antoinette three times, and she supposedly refused it due to her dislike for Du Barry when her husband, Louis XVI, offered it to her.
In 1785, the Countess de la Motte became the mistress of the Cardinal de Rohan, and suggested that if he wishes to regain the Queen's favour, and ultimately become a King's minister, (after supposedly spreading rumours of the Queen's behaviour to her mother Maria Theresa) then she will convince the Queen to meet him. Thus began alleged writing between the Cardinal and the Queen, causing Rohan to believe that the Queen was in love with him by the tone in her letters when all along it was Countess de la Motte. According to Madame Campan, in one of the letters, the Countess, pretending to be the Queen, ordered him to buy the necklace. They were signed 'Marie Antoinette de France.' However, either the Cardinal was naïve or didn't know that the royal family only signed with their given names solely. The jewellers, Charles Auguste Boehmer and Paul Bassange, agreed 'on the queen's behalf' to sell the necklace to Rohan to where he can pay in instalments. Rohan then took the necklace to the house of Countess de la Motte, where he then met a man who he thought was the valet of the Queen. The diamond necklace 'was promptly picked apart, and the gems sold on the black markets of Paris and London' by Madame de la Motte. However, when the instalments were overdue, the Countess presented the money of the Cardinal, which wasn't sufficient and caused the jewellers to question the queen/ Marie Antoinette had no idea about the crime.
The involvement of Jean Charles Vincent de Bette d'Étienville occurred when he urged Baron de Fages-Chaulnes to marry a mistress of the Cardinal Rohan's mistresses if he wanted to resettle his debts. Given her luxurious gifts from the Cardinal, Baron de Fages buys expensive jewellery, furniture, and an apartment for his future wife to meet her expectations. As a result, the Baron ran up a steep debt with Vaucher & Loque, a jeweller and a watchmaker. However, Madame de Courville turns out to be Countess de la Motte, and the plot thickens as Cardinal Rohan delays the marriage due to urgent matters that need to be settled. To 'appease' the Countess, D'Etienville signed to her a deduction of 30,000 livres which he will cash if the marriage were not to take place. Without explanation, she demands the deduction of 30,000 livres promised to the Baron, d'Etienville refuses. Madame de Courville gets angry, and he ends up giving it back to her. She hastens to rip it up and promises to pay for it, whatever happens. In a state of utter distress, she confessed everything: she must leave France quickly because she finds herself involved in a strange case. She pleas for Etienville to follow her to St-Omer, where she promises to give him 30,000 livres. However, de Courville turns back to Paris and never sees Etienville again.
The trial and memoirs: The king and Queen hold a public trial for the Cardinal and his accomplices in an attempt to clear their name, which in return backfired immensely as it became a major catalyst for the French Revolution. Instead of concealing the scandal, Louis XVI had the Cardinal arrested and imprisoned in the Bastille. Furthermore, the king gives the Cardinal a choice between a trial in closed session or before the Parliament of Paris. As the Cardinal decides to leave the judgment to the Parliament, he deliberately makes a shot against royal authority. The Contesse de La Motte was sentenced to be flogged, branded, and imprisoned for life in the Salpêtrière prison in Paris. She later escaped to England and there published the scandalous Mémoires vilifying the Queen. The Baron had been accused because of his friendship with Cardinal Rohan, and several of his friends were accused in turn. On January 23, 1789, he was cleared by Parliament, who gave him the benefit of the doubt due to his naivety.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
“Books about The Affair of the Diamond Necklace.” Joslin Hall, November 2016. https://www.joslinhall.com/necklace_books.htm.
“Affair of the Diamond Necklace.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, June 30, 2019. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affair_of_the_Diamond_Necklace.
Dam. “D'Etienville : Honnête Bourgeois Ou Véritable Escroc ?” artoisbalade, March 27, 2018. http://artoisbalade.fr/detienville-honnete-bourgeois-ou-escroc/.
Popkin, Jeremy. “Pamphlet Journalism at the End of the Old Regime.” Eighteenth-Century Studies, vol. 22, no. 3, 1989, pp. 351–367. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/2738892.
- Location
- Not on display
- Condition
- Latest: 5 (Feb 1996) Check mounting-board.
- Acquisition date
- 1958
- Acquisition notes
- The Ilbert Collection of clocks, prints and other related material was destined to be sold at Christie's auction house on 6th-7th November 1958. As a result of the generous donation of funds by Gilbert Edgar CBE the sale was cancelled and the material purchased privately from the beneficiaries of the Ilbert Estate.
Ilbert's watches were then acquired with further funds from Gilbert Edgar CBE, public donations and government funds. These were then registered in the series 1958,1201.
- Department
- Britain, Europe and Prehistory
- Registration number
- 1958,1006.2758
- Additional IDs
-
Previous owner/ex-collection number: CAI.2758 (Ilbert Collection)