Well you see all I wanted really to ask was whether there is enough information to have an idea of what he was like in temperament, intellect and so on. Maybe a question idea for an OTL History forum, tho of course it has the AH element of what sort of a king he would have been. IIRC 2 of his uncles had genital problems tho I don't think his father did, but heredity works in odd ways. I don't know if there is any medical history/knowledge of him around?
Basically its a question in view of a timeline I'm writing but am looking for the background info on him for it, rather than want to post the whole thing - maybe I will one day, but as the timeline underpins a Victoria II mod its not aimed at being posted per se. It just needs a lot of fleshing out
Thanks for replying tho
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
Not really enough information--he died when he was ten. Another cause is he spent half of his life under the revolutionary regime (he was born in 1785), so his temperament could be disregarded given the stresses of the royal families confinement. The Revolutionary Government handed him over into the care of the head jailer and the boy sung revolutionary songs and damned his parents, although this was partially because of the situation he was in--he also stated that his mother and his aunt had molested him, which again, was probably extracted out of force (or rather out of fear for his own life). There are some reports in Antonia Fraser's biography of Marie-Antoinette about the boy, but not much. Apparently he had a bit of a problem with lying (hence the accusations he laid against his mother). There's also a story of him playing during their confinement a toy horse and bruising one of his testicles.
The story of Louis XVI's problems were certainly made up. He kept a hunting diary and the dates he supposedly had the surgery to 'correct' the problem he was hunting! The main issue he had with Marie-Antoinette was that he didn't really know what he was doing. I know that sounds weird for us modern people, but for someone in the 18th century, it's not too surprising. Other people have said that perhaps sexual intercourse was painful because Marie-Antoinette was 'narrow'... but either way, the two seemed fine after Joseph II came to talk to him, and give him the "Birds and the Bees" so to speak, so I doubt the story about Marie-Antoinette is true. But him requiring surgery to correct a problem is totally false. The Count of Provence (the future Louis XVIII) may have been impotent later in life due to his weight, but he had no issues in the bedchamber either. His wife became pregnant on one or two occasions I believe, but suffered a miscarriage. So it's likely Louis XVII would have no issues begetting children. His behavior and temperament, however, is unknown. It wouldn't be fair to borrow from what we do know, considering it came about owing to their imprisonment, and wouldn't reflect how he might be raised.
It'd be quite different from a typical 18th century French prince, though, Savoy. Marie-Antoinette was "hand's on" and held Rousseau's teachings in regards to parenting in high regard. She also carried out reforms to her household and those of her children, so even the
Ancien Régime was modernizing to an extent. If the French Monarchy had survived without a revolution, it would've become a domestic monarchy much like Victoria's Britain. A bit more absolute, yes, but Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette were much like Victoria and Albert in that they gave a moral and temperate view of the monarchy to the populace (at least, in their earliest years). I think that trend would continue under their son, and the monarchy would become something the middle classes look up too--much like the middle classes of Britain were pleased with Victoria and her break from Georgian Opulence, we might see the middle classes of France cheer on Louis XVII as he moves back to Paris and makes a break with the time of Louis XIV, Louis XV, and Louis XVI.