The Moberly-Jourdain Incident (Versailles Time Slip)

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: Charlotte Anne Moberly was Principal of St Hugh’s College, Oxford, the daughter of the Bishop of Salisbury, and a highly respected academic and educator. She was 55 years old at the time of the incident.

Eleanor Jourdain

Background: Eleanor Jourdain later became Vice-Principal of St Hugh’s College, a scholar and educator, and was 38 years old at the time. Both women possessed impeccable credentials and were equally respectable.

Their Relationship

The two women were colleagues and were visiting Paris together. They had no previous interest in the paranormal and were not prone to fantasy; they had reputations to protect.

The Day of the Incident

August 10, 1901

The setting on August 10, 1901, was a warm summer day, and the women were sightseeing. They decided to visit Versailles, ultimately heading for the Petit Trianon, Marie Antoinette’s private retreat.

Getting Lost

While walking through the grounds, the women left the main palace and headed toward the Petit Trianon. Taking a wrong turn, they entered unfamiliar paths and noticed a change in the atmosphere.

The Experience

The First Strange Encounter

They encountered a woman shaking a white cloth from a window, farm buildings that appeared unusually antiquated, and an “eerie” atmosphere, accompanied by a feeling of oppression and sadness.

The Men with the Wheelbarrow

Approaching the women was a group of two men in grayish-green coats, wearing small three-cornered hats, near what appeared to be a garden building. They asked directions, and 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 “dark and rough.” He seemed to be running or moving urgently, shouting at them in French, “You must not go that way,” before disappearing.

The Kiosk

The women passed a kiosk or small building, where a man sat outside, wearing a cloak and hat. His face was pockmarked and repulsive, and he stared intently at them, creating an intense sense of dread and an oppressive atmosphere.

The Lady Sketching

Near the Petit Trianon, a woman sat on the grass, sketching or reading, wearing a light summer dress with a pale fichu around her shoulders and a white hat. She looked up as they passed, and her face was striking but sad.

Return to Normal

Shortly after, a door opened in a nearby building, and a young man emerged, directing them to the Trianon. The strangeness ended, and they joined a normal tour group.

Afterward

Initial Silence

For three months after the incident, neither woman discussed what happened, both feeling something was strange and unsure of what it was.

Comparing Notes

In November 1901, Moberly mentioned the incident, and they compared their experiences, realizing both had seen strange things. Some details matched, while others differed.

Research

They began investigating historical records of Versailles, maps and plans from different eras, and accounts of Marie Antoinette’s court, focusing on the events of August 10, 1789.

Their Theory

August 10, 1789

They concluded that they had slipped back to August 10, 1789, the day Paris attacked Versailles, Marie Antoinette’s last full day of freedom, and the beginning of the revolution.

The Figures Identified

They believed the sketching woman was Marie Antoinette herself, the pockmarked man was the Comte de Vaudreuil, and the running man was a messenger warning of the mob.

Publication

“An Adventure” (1911)

They published their account under pseudonyms – “Elizabeth Morison” and “Frances Lamont” – and the book became a sensation, with multiple editions following, before their identities were eventually revealed.

Reception

The book was taken seriously by many, debated in academic circles, criticized by skeptics, and investigated by researchers, never definitively explained.

Evidence and Arguments

Supporting Their Account

They noted buildings they described existed in 1789 but were gone by 1901, the costumes matched the 1789 period, details aligned with historical records, and neither woman had previously studied this period.

The Timing

August 10, 1789, was a significant date, the attack on the Tuileries, which would explain the atmosphere of dread and the rushing messenger.

Their Credibility

Both women were highly educated and respected academics, not prone to fabrication and not seeking fame.

Skeptical Responses

Critics suggested they encountered a costume party or theatrical rehearsal, the Comte de Montesquiou held such events, the “Marie Antoinette” was an actress, and they embellished memories over time.

Memory Distortion

Psychologists noted memory is unreliable, their research may have contaminated recollections, comparing notes created shared false memories, and ten years passed before publication.

Wishful Thinking

Some argued they wanted the experience to be supernatural, found evidence that fit their theory, ignored contradictory details, and confirmation bias was at play.

Discrepancies

Problems included their accounts not fully matching, some details not fitting 1789, the paths they claimed to have taken being unclear, and historical identification of figures being uncertain.

Later Investigations

Return Visits

Both women returned to Versailles, but the paths they remembered weren’t there, buildings had changed, and they couldn’t recreate their route.

Other Time Slips

The case sparked interest in other alleged time slip experiences at Versailles, with multiple subsequent claims and a tradition developing.

Modern Analysis

Recent researchers have examined historical records, identified possible living persons they encountered, suggested a theatrical performance explanation, and the debate continues.

Versailles and Time

A Special Place?

Some suggest Versailles has unusual properties, holds residual memories, and is prone to temporal anomalies.

Other Versailles Experiences

Subsequent claims include a 1908 experience by different visitors, a 1928 sighting of figures in period costume, and various tourists reporting “strange atmospheres.”

Legacy

Impact on Culture

The Moberly-Jourdain incident defined the time slip concept, inspired novels and films, became a classic paranormal case, and remains debated today.

Academic Interest

The case is studied as a psychology of memory, paranormal research, historical methodology, and 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.

Sources

• Wikipedia search: “The Moberly-Jourdain Incident (Versailles Time Slip)”