The Moberly-Jourdain Incident

On August 10, 1901, two respectable English academics visited the Palace of Versailles. What they experienced - or believed they experienced - was a journey through time to the court of Marie Antoinette on the eve of the French Revolution. Their account, published as An Adventure, became one of the most famous alleged time slips in history.

The Witnesses

Charlotte Anne Moberly

Background:

• Principal of St Hugh’s College, Oxford
• Daughter of the Bishop of Salisbury
• Academic and educator
• 55 years old at the time
• Highly respectable

Eleanor Jourdain

Background:

• Later became Vice-Principal of St Hugh’s
• Scholar and educator
• 38 years old at the time
• Equally respectable
• Both women had impeccable credentials

Their Relationship

The two:

• Were colleagues
• Were visiting Paris together
• Had no previous interest in the paranormal
• Were not prone to fantasy
• Had reputations to protect

The Day of the Incident

August 10, 1901

The setting:

• A warm summer day
• The women were sightseeing
• They decided to visit Versailles
• After touring the palace, they headed for the Petit Trianon
• Marie Antoinette’s private retreat

Getting Lost

Walking through the grounds:

• They left the main palace
• Headed toward the Petit Trianon
• Took a wrong turn
• Entered unfamiliar paths
• The atmosphere changed

The Experience

The First Strange Encounter

They encountered:

• A woman shaking a white cloth from a window
• Farm buildings that seemed unusual
• An “eerie” atmosphere
• A feeling of oppression and sadness

The Men with the Wheelbarrow

They approached:

• Two men in grayish-green coats
• Wearing small three-cornered hats
• Near what appeared to be a garden building
• They asked directions
• The men pointed ahead without speaking

The Running Man

Near a pavilion:

• A man appeared suddenly
• Wearing a cloak and wide-brimmed hat
• His face was “dark and rough”
• He seemed to be running or moving urgently
• He shouted at them in French
• “You must not go that way”
• He directed them differently
• Then disappeared

The Kiosk

They passed:

• A kiosk or small building
• A man sat outside
• He wore a cloak and hat
• His face was pockmarked and repulsive
• He stared at them
• They felt intense dread
• The atmosphere was oppressive

The Lady Sketching

Near the Petit Trianon:

• A woman sat on the grass
• She was sketching or reading
• She wore a light summer dress
• A pale fichu around her shoulders
• A white hat
• She looked up as they passed
• Her face was striking but sad

Return to Normal

Shortly after:

• A door opened in a nearby building
• A young man emerged
• He directed them to the Trianon
• The atmosphere lifted
• They joined a normal tour group
• The strangeness ended

Afterward

Initial Silence

For three months:

• Neither woman discussed what happened
• Both felt something was strange
• They weren’t sure what

Comparing Notes

In November 1901:

• Moberly mentioned the incident
• They compared their experiences
• They realized both had seen strange things
• Some details matched, others differed

Research

They began investigating:

• Historical records of Versailles
• Maps and plans from different eras
• Accounts of Marie Antoinette’s court
• The events of August 10, 1789

Their Theory

August 10, 1789

They concluded:

• They had slipped back to August 10, 1789
• The day Paris attacked Versailles
• Marie Antoinette’s last full day of freedom
• The revolution was beginning

The Figures Identified

They believed:

• The sketching woman was Marie Antoinette herself
• The pockmarked man was the Comte de Vaudreuil
• The running man was a messenger warning of the mob
• They had witnessed a moment frozen in time

Publication

”An Adventure” (1911)

They published their account:

• Under pseudonyms initially
• “Elizabeth Morison” and “Frances Lamont”
• The book became a sensation
• Multiple editions followed
• Their identities were eventually revealed

Reception

The book was:

• Taken seriously by many
• Debated in academic circles
• Criticized by skeptics
• Investigated by researchers
• Never definitively explained

Evidence and Arguments

Supporting Their Account

They noted:

• Buildings they described had existed in 1789 but were gone by 1901
• The costumes matched the 1789 period
• Details aligned with historical records
• Neither woman had previously studied this period

The Timing

August 10:

• Was a significant date in 1789
• The attack on the Tuileries
• Would explain the atmosphere of dread
• Would explain the rushing messenger

Their Credibility

Both women were:

• Highly educated
• Respected academics
• Not prone to fabrication
• Not seeking fame
• Published only after extensive research

Skeptical Responses

Normal Explanation

Critics suggested:

• They encountered a costume party or theatrical rehearsal
• The Comte de Montesquiou held such events
• The “Marie Antoinette” was an actress
• They embellished memories over time

Memory Distortion

Psychologists noted:

• Memory is unreliable
• Their research may have contaminated recollections
• Comparing notes created shared false memories
• Ten years passed before publication

Wishful Thinking

Some argued:

• They wanted the experience to be supernatural
• They found evidence that fit their theory
• They ignored contradictory details
• Confirmation bias at work

Discrepancies

Problems included:

• Their accounts didn’t fully match
• Some details they described didn’t fit 1789
• The paths they claimed to have taken are unclear
• Historical identification of figures is uncertain

Later Investigations

Return Visits

Both women returned to Versailles:

• The paths they remembered weren’t there
• Buildings had changed
• They couldn’t recreate their route
• This seemed to support their account

Other Time Slips

The case sparked interest in:

• Other alleged time slip experiences
• Versailles seemed to be a hotspot
• Multiple subsequent claims
• A tradition developed

Modern Analysis

Recent researchers have:

• Examined historical records
• Identified possible living persons they encountered
• Suggested a theatrical performance explanation
• The debate continues

Versailles and Time

A Special Place?

Some suggest Versailles:

• Has unusual properties
• Holds residual memories
• Is prone to temporal anomalies
• Other time slips reported there

Other Versailles Experiences

Subsequent claims include:

• 1908: Similar experience by different visitors
• 1928: Figures in period costume seen
• Various tourists reporting “strange atmospheres”
• A pattern of temporal experiences

Legacy

Impact on Culture

The Moberly-Jourdain incident:

• Defined the time slip concept
• Inspired novels and films
• Became a classic paranormal case
• Remains debated today

Academic Interest

The case is studied as:

• Psychology of memory
• Paranormal research
• Historical methodology
• The power of suggestion

The Question

Two Oxford academics visited Versailles on a summer day in 1901.

They walked into the gardens and into the past.

Or did they?

Did they somehow slip through time to witness August 10, 1789 - the last hours before the revolution swept Marie Antoinette from her private paradise?

Did they see the doomed queen herself, sketching in her garden as Paris prepared to storm the gates?

Or did they encounter a costume party, embroider their memories over a decade, and construct a fantasy from historical research?

Charlotte Anne Moberly and Eleanor Jourdain were not dreamers. They were serious academics with reputations to lose.

But they went to their graves believing they had visited the past.

The paths they walked are still there. The gardens remain. The Petit Trianon stands where it stood in 1789 and 1901.

And occasionally, a visitor claims to feel something strange. A shift in atmosphere. A sense of another time.

Perhaps Versailles remembers.

Perhaps time is not as fixed as we believe.

Or perhaps two women simply got lost in the gardens and the mystery of their own minds.

The Moberly-Jourdain incident. One of the most famous time slips in history.

And still, after more than a century, unexplained.