Just before the turn of the 18th century Julie d’Aubigny, Mademoiselle Maupin or “La Maupin”, made her opera debut with the Paris Opera. Their extraordinary life takes place at a time when French society began re-examining gender roles and sexual identity. Like Mary Frith, details of d’Aubigny’s private life are a combination of truths and fabrications though with their associations with nobility and early French opera there is somewhat of a trustworthy timeline of the events that chronicle their early and professional life. Also like Frith, one facet of d’Aubigny’s life that is repeated through each recounting is the performative act of dressing solely in men’s clothing.
Julie was born in 1670, or 1673 depending on the source, during the reign of Louis the Fourteenth. Her father was employed by the Count d’Armagnac who would eventually take Julie as his lover. Julie’s father’s position allowed him to educate her in subjects normally reserved for boys. At twelve-years-old she was trained in fencing. Her skills with the sword earn her notoriety and infamy, and contribute to the lore surrounding her life. It was at this time that Julie began wearing men’s clothing.
By the age of 14 years Julie was married to Sieur Jean de Maupin. They would take Maupin’s surname, becoming Mademoiselle Maupin, or as they would come to be known professionally as “La Maupin”. Not long after the nuptials, Julie’s new husband, a clerk for the Count d’Armagnac, was assigned a tax collector’s position in the south of France requiring him to relocate. Julie, however, would remain in Paris as the mistress of the Count d’Armagnac.
Though it is unclear how or when the relationship with the Count ended, Julie would begin an affair with a fencing master at court, Séranne. After killing a man during an illegal duel, Séranne decided to flee. La Maupin followed.
The two lovers, Séranne and Julie, toured the countryside giving fencing demonstrations and singing to earn a living. Their travels took them to Marseille where Julie would have their first professional operatic singing experience as a mezzo-soprano with the new opera company there. They had no formal training in music though apparently they had natural talent and were attractive enough that their beauty was an asset. It was during this time in Marseille that Julie ended the relationship with the fencing master and began their first (recorded) lesbian affair. The intense, short-lived affair, however, was not without difficulties.
The family of the young woman did not approve of the relationship. d'Aubigny was an obvious gender non-conformist and probably seen as a threat: a biological female in men's clothing. Again like Frith, La Maupin is reported never to have denied her biological sex, nor had she ever tried to legitimately pass as a male. The family of the young woman sent their daughter to live in a convent near Avignon. The resourceful, and often reckless, D’Aubigny followed the young woman, joining the convent and continuing the affair.
Once embedded in the convent, the affair between Julie and the young woman continued. It was undeniable that they could not go on with the rest of their lives having a secret affair in a convent and so they made a plan to escape and run away together. Julie devised a plan that would not only free them but would ensure that no one came looking for them. On the night of the planned escape, d’Aubigny and the young woman placed the cadaver of a recently deceased nun in the bed of the young woman. Julie then set the room on fire in hopes that the deceased nun would be falsely identified as the young woman. The ill-conceived plan was a failure and Julie and the young woman were on the run from the law. Julie was tried in absentia and sentenced to death by fire.
Not surprisingly, the affair only lasted a few more months before they and the young woman went their separate ways. It was during this time that Julie took voice lessons and decided to try their luck with the Paris Opera. Before returning they would need to consider the considerable death sentence that was hanging over their head. Once they were back in Paris they continued their relationship with the Count d’Armagnac. It is mere speculation to assume that Julie was well-aware of the usefulness of the Count as he would arrange for a pardon for them for their failed plan at the convent in Avignon. The productive reunion with the count must have also been short-lived because shortly after, Julie began an affair with a young baritone Gabriel-Vincent Thevenard who had been recently hired by the Paris Opera. This affair also proved useful for La Maupin as Thevenard helped to bring them on at the Opera. The two would sing their first roles with the opera that same year.
By the time La Maupin debuted with the Paris Opera in 1690 they would have been at least seventeen but no more than twenty years old. They would sing mezzo-soprano roles in about two dozen major productions until 1694. Later in their career she would come to be recognized for their beautiful natural contralto voice. During their initial time with the Paris Opera Julie became more and more well-known not only because of their performances where they exhibited exceptional singing and acting abilities but also for their unconventional, and many times, explosive private life. Their exploits became well-known as their fame with the Opera grew and as a result, like most other famous people, theirprivate life and actions were placed under a microscope. Again like Frith, d’Aubigny’s display of performative acts was thought to have quite the roaring affect.
Their work with the Opera came to a halt in 1694 after d’Aubigny attended a particular ball gala. For much of the evening Julie had been attending romantically to a noblewoman and at one point kissed her drawing the ire of three noblemen who were all vying for the woman. The three men challenged d’Aubigny to a duel. Most if not all sources report that La Maupin was an expert swordsperson. d’Aubigny accepted their challenges, taking each noble one after another and beating each. Unfortunately for Julie, dueling had been outlawed and they found themself again fleeing Paris pursued by authorities. One asks, had one of the nobleman won their duel would anyone have had to flee the city? In any case, Julie escaped to Brussels where they would sing for a short time with the opera company there.
However, in 1698 it was time to return to Paris. Utilizing their political ties once again, d’Aubigny was pardoned for a second time for the dueling crimes committed at the ball. They made their way back to Paris where they sang again with the Paris Opera during which time they were in numerous productions and originated as many as twenty-five roles.
Their reputation as a singer in the Paris Opera, spiced with the drama of their personal life, inspired a character specifically created for them by Andre Campra in his opera Tancrède. Based on Torquato Tasso's epic poem Gerusalemme liberata from 1581, Tancrède premiered in 1702 with d’Aubigny playing the female lead role, Chlorinde. Campra composed the role to best showcase La Maupin’s contralto range. The tragedy of Chlorinde’s fate is encapsulated in Gene Tyranny’s synopsis:
“Tancrède is in fact taken captive but Herminie intervenes, declares her love for him, and prevents Iseménor from running him through with his sword. Nevertheless, Iseménor, angered, again attempts to kill Tancrède, but now Clorinde prevents his deed and frees Tancrède. But Clorinde is still a Saracen warrior and sacrifices a love affair to her duty. Later, at night, Tancrède engages in battle and thinks he has killed Argant, the Saracen leader; but in a shocking turn of events, Argant has only been wounded by the crusaders and it was Clorinde, dressed in Argant's armor, who was mortally stricken by Tancrède who is despairing and suicidal as the opera ends.”
The opera is historically important in that it is regarded as “the first appearance of a contralto in a leading role on the French lyric stage”. La Maupin would go on to sing heroic women’s roles at the Paris Opera for the remainder of their career. An interesting point in Julie’s life is that unlike some of the individuals written about in this monograph, d’Aubigny’s artistic output was mostly free from any mentions of cross-dressing or gender bending for the stage save for their debut in 1690 and their leading role in Tancrède.
I would like to imagine that the irony of having a cross-dressed role written for them was not lost on d’Aubigny and that she, the other performers, and audiences found a sense of humor in that decision. Between the lines there lies the question of what, if any, was Campra’s intent? Was this simply a sensational device used to create interest, a genuine nod to La Maupin as an artist and individual, or a combination of both.
In 1703 d’Aubigny met who would be her final romantic partner; Madame la Marquise de Florensac. The Madame de Marquise was fabulously wealthy, beautiful, and promiscuous. The two were together until 1705 when Florensac contracted a fever and died two days later. Grief-stricken, Julie retired from the opera stage. There are conflicting stories about Julie’s whereabouts after the death of the Madame de Marquise placing her either in a monastery or at the side of her husband, the tax collector from her marriage in 1687. What is known for certain is that Julie d’Aubigny died in 1707.
As in each of the case studies, a number of factors were taken into account in discerning the alternative possibilities of d’Aubigny’s gender identity. Utilizing the lens of performativity as a metric we can see that d’Aubigny's acts fall distinctly outside of prescribed heteronormative performative acts, for example, the consistent acting out of “mannish” ways like dueling and dressing solely in traditionally male clothing. In previous writings Julie is generally spoken of as bisexual but I think it is plausible that they were gender-fluid.
During their career as a mezzo-soprano with the newly formed Opera de Marseille or singing contralto at the Paris Opera, there were only a few instances of on-stage cross-dressing rather than making it the central feature of their career. They chose to wear men’s clothing in their private life while white moving with fluidity between male and female lovers. If d’Aubigny had been simply cis-gendered bisexual what could have been the purpose to dress only in man’s clothing, the outward expression of the opposite gender, though not trying to pass as male?
My consideration that Julie d’Aubigny was gender-fluid rather than bisexual hinges on, like Mary Frith, they were not wearing men’s clothing as a disguise, this was a life-long practice from the age of fourteen. Though a few times on the wrong side of the law, d’Aubigny was not a criminal. Julie’s crossdressing was not a device of criminality. It was simply an expression, and one of several performative act repeated over and over signaling a rejection of traditional gender roles established by their contemporary hegemony.
Next Chapter: Chevalier d'Eon