AHC: French Pornocracy

Pornocracy means rule of the mistresses. In the 10th century (904-963) Rome and thus the Papacy was a pornocracy because the true powers was in the hand of the mistress of the pope.
What if the mistresses of the french king had been more than just mistresses but were the true power behind the throne (as long as they were mistresses)?
 
Weren't they? :D I mean, M.me de Pompadour and M.me du Barry, for instance, had ALOT of actual, informal power.
 
That were two out of how many? More than fifty between 1582 and 1848?
The Maîtresse-en-titre was a semi-official position at the court. And some of them had a lot of power. But none of them were the true power behind the throne.
It would be interesting if the position of Maîtresse-en-titre had been evolved into some sort of (inofficial) prime minister.
 
That were two out of how many? More than fifty between 1582 and 1848?
The Maîtresse-en-titre was a semi-official position at the court. And some of them had a lot of power. But none of them were the true power behind the throne.
It would be interesting if the position of Maîtresse-en-titre had been evolved into some sort of (inofficial) prime minister.

I think that under M.me de Pompadour that was rather underway, but you are right, that evolution was never fully achieved. Problem is that such things as Catholicism would be a tad strongly against it.
 
Catholocism is not the problem, because even the bishops and cardinals at the court had mistresses.

Aye. In the Decameron (which usually gets the background, if not the stories, right) there are a number of references to church officials up to the Pope being influenced not only by mistresses but by rent boys.
 
Pornocracy doesn't seem that easily to achieve or maintain as a government, be it in France or another country... That a King has a mistress is one thing, that the mistress gains political power is another. What a King does in his bedroom is not the concern of the court or the people but what he does in Politics is: there will forcibly be people that will find the situation untolerable and try to solve the problem one way or another.

Plus, if you really want that king of regime to hold, you need the maitresse-en-titre of the current king to choose her successor for the next one: a son generally doesn't want the mistress of his father, especially if she's older than him. The only case I know about a mistress staying with two succeeding kings is Diane de Poitiers, who had been a mistress of François Ier before the latter got bored with her and gave her to his son Henri II. But Diane was never the maitresse-en-titre of François Ier...

One last thing is that mistresses tend only to be linked to "bedroom matters" or to be "companion of the King" when they do no longer share the same bed (Mme de Pompadour always remained the maitresse-en-titre although she no longer slept with Louis XV). I do know that France had a bunch of Kings who were womanizers (François Ier, Henri II, Henri III, Henri IV, Louis XIV, Louis XV) but few of the mistresses really had any influence on politics: Mme de Maintenon & Mme de Pompadour are the only exceptions I see personnally.
 
Pornocracy means rule of the mistresses. In the 10th century (904-963) Rome and thus the Papacy was a pornocracy because the true powers was in the hand of the mistress of the pope.
What if the mistresses of the french king had been more than just mistresses but were the true power behind the throne (as long as they were mistresses)?

Brilliant idea. Remind me to sooner or later incorporate this into my Vinlandic timeline...
 
I like the idea. More Éminence Scarlet (or other suitably mistress-y colour) than Éminence Grise. But I think it would take a very strong personality of a mistress and a very feeble king to have the position evolve into anything more than companionship. I doubt if many of he French kings consulted matters of state with their mistresses much.
 
Top