First-time travelers to Paris often dedicate a day to seeing the Palace of Versailles. I avoided the place for many years in favor of dozens of museums and monuments within the city limits. However, in 2018, I finally visited with my husband Andy and our daughters. The line to get in was discouraging, but after more than an hour on public transit, we weren’t about to turn around. Being the obedient tourists that we are, we waited in the shadeless courtyard for over an hour to gain access to what historian Sarah Vowell refers to as the morally and architecturally bankrupt compendium of gilded nonsense and silken flimflam.
The Palace of Versailles
Though the entry line was packed, I reassured myself that the palace is massive, containing over 2,300 rooms. As we waited, I studied the interior layout, planning a route that would take us far from the entrance as soon as we were inside. Once at the ticket window, however, we learned that fewer than a dozen rooms were open that day. So, we joined another, even more crowded line of people and were herded along at a pace that might satisfy the curiosity of the average chimp.
When traveling, I tend to take an abundance of photos, but in gathering images for this piece, I found I’d only managed to snap one picture inside the palace. It doesn’t surprise me because the rooms were so crowded that stopping to consider a camera angle, let alone study a scene, was about as comfortable as dog paddling against a salmon run. Apparently, this famous portrait of Louis XIV seemed worth the hassle.
A peeved-looking Louis XIV looks back at the crowds. His expression imparted, “Quit your whining. I had to look at these red walls every day while wrapped in a king-size bedspread of ermine pelt and velvet, embroidered with thread spun from real gold. These form-fitting tights and garters are no picnic. And, do you see the narrow toes on these pumps?”
On Andy’s camera roll, I found this picture of the Hall of Mirrors. The atmosphere was spacious compared to the rooms of the king’s apartment.
In short order, we’d completed the congested pilgrimage and were relieved when the tour led us outside. Happily, our ticket granted access to Versailles’ vast array of gardens, as well as access to smaller, yet equally opulent, buildings on the extensive grounds. I decided that day that if I ever return, I’ll skip the main palace altogether, rent a bicycle, and spend the day exploring the property’s exterior attractions.
The Palace of Fontainebleau
Fast-forward to 2023, when I decided to lead friends on a day-trip to the Palace of Fontainebleau. All that I’d read about this second royal residence gave me the impression that it was possibly as exquisite as Versailles yet far less crowded. To my delight, both of those claims were understatements.
To be fair, I visited Versailles in June and Fontainebleau in April, but not only was there no line at Fontainebleau, several dozen rooms were open, and it often felt like we had the place to ourselves.
Originally established as a hunting lodge for Louis VII in the 12th century, Fontainebleau is more than twice as old as Versailles. Thus, you might expect the architecture and interiors to be less ornate but this is hardly the case. Unlike Versailles, Fontainebleau’s architecture is far more varied and eclectic, having been remodeled and added onto by various monarchs over a period of 500 years.
More than one hundred years before Versailles was built, François I (you may recall the French king who ransomed his two sons), hired Renaissance architects and artisans from Italy to transform the hunting lodge into a palace. Amazing what one can accomplish when childcare is outsourced to a Spanish prison. Below are pictures from the François I Gallery. Note the gold Fs embossed on the wooden paneling.
Historical Richness
Undoubtedly, Versailles has numerous colorful episodes from its past, such as the Affair of the Diamond Necklace. But the nature of our visit was such that I left with only a mild interest in ever returning. Not so with Fontainebleau. The freedom to linger allowed us to read placards and pass through rooms that heightened, rather than satiated, my curiosity.
At Fontainebleau, I had a deeper sense of history unfolding around me. An example is the Gallery of Diana, built by the jovial Henri IV at the turn of the 17th century. The affable king hired Flemish painter Ambroise Dubois to adorn the vaulted gallery with scenes from the myth of Diana, goddess of the Hunt. When Napoleon I came to power, he found the room in poor condition. During the French Revolution, the castle had been stripped of its furniture, artwork, mirrors, and even its windows, exposing many interiors to the ravages of bad weather.
Napoleon much preferred Fontainebleau to Versailles and began restoring it to its former glory, this time a palace fit for an Emperor. In honor of his uncle, Napoleon III transformed the gallery into a library containing roughly 16,000 works that had belonged to Napoleon I. He also moved his uncle’s globe, shown below, from the Tuileries into the new bibliothèque. Given Napoleon I’s commitment to education, I can’t help but wonder if there’s a copy of Diderot’s encyclopedia somewhere on those shelves—a mystery that might be solved on a second visit.
From the Middle Ages to the 19th century, thirty-four kings and two emperors called the Palace of Fontainebleau their home. A significant portion of the castle, however, is devoted to the 10-year reign of Napoleon Bonaparte, 1804 – 1814. A small museum houses furniture, art, costumes, and weapons from the Napoleonic era. And, restored to their original magnificence, are the emperor’s bedroom as well as the drawing room where Napoleon signed the Act of Abdication in 1814 that ended his reign.
If Napoleon’s overcoat looks small in the picture, it’s because it is. However, I doubt the megalomaniacal monarch truly needed that staircase to climb into bed.
Admittedly, I didn’t get to see much of Versailles, but the king’s apartment and Hall of Mirrors must surely be among the most ornate rooms of the palace. Yet, I didn’t find them all that striking. Again, Fontainebleau’s artistry outdid Versailles at every turn. Below are a few examples of its beautiful floors, furnishings, art, and architecture.
The Forest of Fontainebleau
Like Versailles, the Palace of Fontainebleau features a meticulously maintained grid of ponds and gardens. We didn’t spend much time there, but the scale pales in comparison to the grounds of Versailles—130 vs. 800 hectares. However, Fontainebleau’s manicured grounds are situated on the edge of France’s second-largest forest, which spans approximately 25,000 hectares. As an avid hiker, I’d love to return to the area for several days. Not only to revisit the palace but to sample some of the over 1600 kilometers of trails for walking, hiking, and mountain biking.
Your Thoughts
I hope I haven’t come down too negatively on Versailles. The reality is that each of these royal residences serves as both a historical museum and an art museum rolled into one massive showspace. Given infinite time, I’d return to both. What do you think? Have you ever visited? I’d love to hear your thoughts about either of these celebrated châteaux.
Discover more from cas d'intérêt
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I also recommend Vaux le vicomte
Bien recommandé à ce que j’entends, mais pas été encore…
Thanks for the recommendation Emma. I checked out their website. Looks very interesting, especially the Musée des equipages. On the downside, it’s two hours outside of Paris rather than one.
I wholeheartedly agree with your suggestion! The last time we visited Versailles we decided not to fight the crowds and instead had a lovely day exploring the gardens. And Fontainebleu is a wonderful alternative.
May I also suggest Chantilly? Less grand than Versailles, but completely stunning, and with much more civilized and smaller crowds.
Great suggestion. I’ve never been but have considered visiting Chantilly in the past. Thanks for the reminder.
Excellent post Carol. I visited Versailles ages and ages ago, and don’t plan to go back in this lifetime.
I’ve always wondered about Fontainebleau, but felt the transport there is not great. A bit long. I might be wrong.
Rueil-Malmaison is close by and very nice. Joséphine’s palace. Very nice. have you been there?
Thanks Brieuc. I’d like to pedal around the the grounds of Versailles, if only to get a better sense of its size. If I ever go back, I’d also try to visit the stables and Marie Antoinette’s hamlet.
Regarding Fontainebleau, you’re right it’s a bit of a trek. However, if you have the 5-zone Navigo pass, you can get there without extra fees. I like to stay in Vincennes so I always clock routes from there: roughly 75 mins on public transit.
I knew nothing about Rueil-Malmaison so thanks for mentioning it. That’s the easiest commute of all that’s been discussed. Straight shot on the RER A. It would be interesting to read some of the correspondence there between Napoleon and Josephine. I like the fact that she had the architect copy the style of Fontainebleau. I’ve also never been to Nanterre. Are there are other places in that corner of town that you’ve enjoyed?
To tell you the truth, I’m not a fan of these kinds of places. Way too much opulence.
I get it. I think a fair number of people go to bask in that opulence and imagine themselves living in such circumstances. I’m not at all in that camp which might be part of why it took me so long to visit.
I’m more interested in the history and the craftmanship that went into the making of these chateaux. I’m not a fan of the Louvre either, because its just too big. I prefer smaller museums/exhibits in general but for some reason, Fontainebleau has captured my interest. I hope to learn more about the lives of many of its residents, from Catherine de Medici to Henri IV to Napoleon III.
However, I can understand being turned off by the excessive display of wealth, built upon the exploitation of the masses.
Do you have recommendations for something less opulent near or in Paris? ♂️ As groovy as this seems, may not be my ‘thing’!
I’ve not visited but one reader, equinoxio21, has suggested Rueil-Malmaison which is just outside of Paris. Josephine Bonaparte had it built in the style of Fontainebleau.
Also, there are several museums throughout Paris that were once the homes of the artists whose works are featured inside. Examples I’ve been to include Rodin, Delacroix, Victor Hugo, Balzac, and Gustave Moreau. I greatly appreciated all of them.
I didn’t know about Fontainebleau’s connection to Napoleon, thanks for that information. I would go there ~ I would go to Versailles, too but I hate long lines, so I might reconsider that! I would love to go to Château de Chenonceau. Honestly, I would go almost anywhere.
The Château de Chenonceau is an excellent choice! If I were to choose a single castle for people to visit, this would be the one. It’s gorgeous, older than Versailles (built by François I), has a ton of dramatic history (like the fact that Catherine de Medici ousted her husband’s mistress from the place after he died and installed her son), has beautiful grounds, and the interior collection is magnificently curated. Thanks for adding it to the conversation.
I would expect the older building to be more interesting because, as you said, it includes a wider range of architectural styles due to being modified over the centuries. Fontainebleau certainly doesn’t disappoint.
With their endless elaborate art and ornamentation, places like this are really best suited to be museums. They do represent the reality of the ruling class of their era. I could not imagine ever living in such a place, though. Having such a dense riot of ornamentation everywhere you looked would eventually get distracting, even aggravating. And it doesn’t exactly suggest the casual comfort of a true home. You couldn’t just tack up your favorite Taylor Swift poster on the wall.
As you mentioned in your reply to YAB, it’s impossible to look at such palaces without thinking of the ordinary masses of people whose taxes paid for all of it. I wonder if they have a museum somewhere that shows how the typical person in France lived in 1789 or the centuries before. I’d definitely visit that. But you know in advance the contrast would be staggering.
I agree Infidel, the lives of the people that lived in these places are hardly desirable. The same might be said of the mega rich of today. IMO, anyone fixated on that much material wealth is depriving themselves of what I consider to be the finer things of life.
The thought of a Taylor Swift poster hanging near King Louis XIV’s bed caused me to laugh out loud. Since basically all performing roles were held by men, the best a heterosexual king could hope for at that time would be an oil painting of a leading actor in drag.
Your comment puts me on a new quest to find more museums that show how commoners lived. In Strasbourg, there’s a fantastic historical museum that comes close. It contains a lot of information about how farmers lived but as landowners, they were relatively wealthy. Still, a fascinating place to visit.
“So many places…” So true! Another place I recently discovered online is the chateau were Rosa Bonheur lived. It’s not far from Fontainebleau—another reason to spend a few days in that area.
Thanks for commenting. I’ve learned from your blog over the years that you have a deep appreciation for Versailles. You certainly know better than I of its many treasures. I’m glad you weighed in.
In August, my wife and I visited Versailles, but rented bicycles. We rode the beautiful path around the grand canal. We encountered maybe 10 people. It was was fantastic. As we approached the gardens/fountains, the throngs of people assured us that we had the best visit and quickly pedaled back out to the peace of the trees and the birds. Enjoying our simple lunch on a quiet bench is the best memory for us.
That sounds wonderful. Thanks for sharing your experience.