A Surviving Mirabeau

The Comte Mirabeau seems to me to be one of the few politicians during the early Revolutionary period that wanted change and wanted a king (he settled on Louis XVI by default, because he regarded Philippe Égalite as weak). However, his feuds (for want of a better term) with the Marquis de Lafayette (who monopolized the army and the national guard) and Jacques Necker (the minister of finance) were problematic. Lafayette later incited the king against Mirabeau and as a result Louis lost all confidence in him.

His ideas on what the state should be, and how it should be run, were good ones - he didn't seek to simply copy England, but rather adapt English models to work in the France of the day. A moderate who proposed a constitutional monarchy, but who's turn never came - well, it did come, a few weeks before his death - I could see him directing the monarchy, and the French state (maybe even as premier ministre) in a different direction to what happened OTL.

If he were to live, and several of his ideas were carried through, what effect might this have
 
Last edited:
Is anyone alive out there?

No, I'm afraid we're all dead. Nevertheless, I'll comment from the Great Beyond. :D

The first problem: Mirabeau was pretty wrecked by the time he died IOTL. He'd led a very interesting and very wild life, he was completely overworked, and as a result his health was failing. Taking a few months off to recuperate could have saved him, I guess, but by then it would likely be too late to save the revolution from itself. This makes your premise hard to achieve.

Let us assume it can be done, somehow. I agree with you that Mirabeau was pretty much the best chance the monarchy had. He could have worked out his differences with La Fayette, and in fact advocated including La Fayette in the to-be-established government, as minister of war and/or supreme commander of the armed forces.

The second problem: Jacques Necker. Mirabeau wanted to include him in his government, and that would lead to problems. Necker was, all by himself, a lead cause of the revolution. His economic policies were disastrous, and IOTL, he showed zero signs of accepting that fact and embracing reform. If Necker gets made minister of finance under Mirabeau, that will be bad, the French economy will suffer, and Mirabeau's government will likely be toppled. After that, chances are the revolution radicalizes anyway.

The bottom line: it's very hard to save the monarchy. You'd need a stable government that actually addresses the problems facing France. Considering the people involved, that's easier said than done. If certain troublemakers (Necker, first and foremost) can be removed from the get-go, you have a chance. A constitutional monarchy will be acceptable to all other European powers (Britain will actually cheer and applaud), so you prevent a lot of war. If Mirabeau can address the issues facing France right away, that removes the raison d'être for the more radical revolutionaries.

France would essentially become a moderate, consitutional monarchy, much like Great Britain. Not the same, but based on the same principles. They'd likely still get a Declaration of Rights and stuff like that, but it would be less radical.

But again: this is hard to achieve. Getting Mirabeau to live longer is challenging in itself, and creating a situation where he manages to include competent people in his government while excluding the overrated self-aggrandizing bastards (I mean you, Necker!) is very difficult.

(In my own TL, I'm currently dealing with all these issues, but the whole timeframe is different there, so my solutions could not help you, I'm afraid.)
 
No, I'm afraid we're all dead. Nevertheless, I'll comment from the Great Beyond. :D

The first problem: Mirabeau was pretty wrecked by the time he died IOTL. He'd led a very interesting and very wild life, he was completely overworked, and as a result his health was failing. Taking a few months off to recuperate could have saved him, I guess, but by then it would likely be too late to save the revolution from itself. This makes your premise hard to achieve.

Let us assume it can be done, somehow. I agree with you that Mirabeau was pretty much the best chance the monarchy had. He could have worked out his differences with La Fayette, and in fact advocated including La Fayette in the to-be-established government, as minister of war and/or supreme commander of the armed forces.

The second problem: Jacques Necker. Mirabeau wanted to include him in his government, and that would lead to problems. Necker was, all by himself, a lead cause of the revolution. His economic policies were disastrous, and IOTL, he showed zero signs of accepting that fact and embracing reform. If Necker gets made minister of finance under Mirabeau, that will be bad, the French economy will suffer, and Mirabeau's government will likely be toppled. After that, chances are the revolution radicalizes anyway.

The bottom line: it's very hard to save the monarchy. You'd need a stable government that actually addresses the problems facing France. Considering the people involved, that's easier said than done. If certain troublemakers (Necker, first and foremost) can be removed from the get-go, you have a chance. A constitutional monarchy will be acceptable to all other European powers (Britain will actually cheer and applaud), so you prevent a lot of war. If Mirabeau can address the issues facing France right away, that removes the raison d'être for the more radical revolutionaries.

France would essentially become a moderate, consitutional monarchy, much like Great Britain. Not the same, but based on the same principles. They'd likely still get a Declaration of Rights and stuff like that, but it would be less radical.

But again: this is hard to achieve. Getting Mirabeau to live longer is challenging in itself, and creating a situation where he manages to include competent people in his government while excluding the overrated self-aggrandizing bastards (I mean you, Necker!) is very difficult.

(In my own TL, I'm currently dealing with all these issues, but the whole timeframe is different there, so my solutions could not help you, I'm afraid.)

Okay, so no Necker, and a Lafayette on a dog-leash?
 
Okay, so no Necker, and a Lafayette on a dog-leash?

That, and convincing the king to vocally support the new government and constitution. The king must be seen embracing the new system, thus legitimizing it for the conservatives, and legitimizing him for the reformers. That way, provided the government gets France in shape (economically, first and foremost), removes the incentives for radicalism on both sides. Which means no civil war with monarchists, and no radicals taking over the Assembly/Convention.

The ramifications are huge, of course. Franco-British alliance seems likely. Decades of war get butterflied away. Instead of that, you might see people following the French example, and get a very early '1848', with the people demanding constitutional monarchies, and the monarchs likely giving in (to some extent) to prevent revolution.
 
That, and convincing the king to vocally support the new government and constitution. The king must be seen embracing the new system, thus legitimizing it for the conservatives, and legitimizing him for the reformers. That way, provided the government gets France in shape (economically, first and foremost), removes the incentives for radicalism on both sides. Which means no civil war with monarchists, and no radicals taking over the Assembly/Convention.

The ramifications are huge, of course. Franco-British alliance seems likely. Decades of war get butterflied away. Instead of that, you might see people following the French example, and get a very early '1848', with the people demanding constitutional monarchies, and the monarchs likely giving in (to some extent) to prevent revolution.

I read that the royal family didn't particularly like Lafayette, but tolerated him - and yet, when push came to shove, they valued his opinion in shunting Mirabeau out the door. Maybe have Lafayette do something which compromises his credibility and he has less chance to remove Mirabeau?
 
Necker, a disaster?
What?
he was pretty much the
only person in the entire country interested in making the country financially viable. Yes, he was unpopular, but if Louis had just kept him around longer, instead of dismissing him when he got too unpopular and then bringing him when when the money problems reached an acute crisis yet again, then maybe the monarchy might have survived.
 
I read that the royal family didn't particularly like Lafayette, but tolerated him - and yet, when push came to shove, they valued his opinion in shunting Mirabeau out the door. Maybe have Lafayette do something which compromises his credibility and he has less chance to remove Mirabeau?

La Fayette wasn't a particularly forcible personality, so you can easily contive a way to push him aside. If Mirabeau gets to live and gets to appoint the members of his own government, La Fayette will not be the problem. But, other than Dathi THorfinnsson seems to believe, Necker would be a major problem.


Necker, a disaster?
What?
he was pretty much the only person in the entire country interested in making the country financially viable. Yes, he was unpopular, but if Louis had just kept him around longer, instead of dismissing him when he got too unpopular and then bringing him when when the money problems reached an acute crisis yet again, then maybe the monarchy might have survived.

Necker tried to "solve" the huge deficits by increasing the debt on a massive scale, adding the problem of interest payments to the deficits in the mid- to long-term. France was already in debt when he took office, but reforms could still have saved the country - even with the expense of the involvement in the American revolutionary war. Instead, Necker financed eveything through huge and wildly irresponsible loans.

When he took office the second time, he actually encountered his own mess, which no-one had solved in the meantime. By that point, thanks largely to Necker, France was basically bankrupt. Still, a willingness to reform could have improved matters greatly. Necker instead made the existing problems worse, and then blamed all problems on others. Finally confronted with his errors during his third stint in office, he cooked the books, created a completely false representation of the kingdom's financial situation, and pretended that there was a huge surplus. When called before the Estates-General, he refused to admit that he had made any mistakes, even though it was evident by that point that he was a fraudulent charlatan. Expected to humbly announce the much needed reforms, he instead gave another hours-long presentation full of mostly made-up numbers and figures, wherein he again tried to "prove" that he was a genius and there was no deficit. That speech was one of the deciding moments in the short stint of the Estates-General, and greatly contributed to the radicalization that eventually led to its dissolution.

But Necker, who had always avoided the tough decisions and blamed others for his own numerous mistakes, was still popular with the public. They had read his false reports, and assumed their contents to be true. (He was actually very popular at most times... before it was discovered that he was a fraud, his reports were faked, and he'd covered the deficits with borrowed money, leading to a huge public debt and even greater deficits. Calonne, who was in charge between Necker's first two stints in office, had previously done the same thing. When he realized what Necker had been up to, he tried to warn people... and was dismissed. It was later said: "Calonne was cheered when lighting the fire, and damned when sounding the alarm". Necker never even went for the alarm: he just kept pouring fuel on the fire.)

Even after the National Assembly had already given way to the National Constituent Assembly, Necker was still under the frankly delusional impression that he would be the genius to save France. His last great act was... urging Louis XVI to accept the proposal that the king's right of veto be reduced to a "suspensive veto," meaning Louis could only delay laws and not block them. With this, the king surrendered his chief prerogative, which directly led to him not being able to prevent the adoption of a terribly foolish decree that determined that members of the new government could not be chosen from the Assembly. This ruled out pretty much every capable man in France. Thanks, Necker! Great job!

So... you call that "the only person in the entire country interested in making the country financially viable"? I'm afraid you've been hoodwinked. Jacques Necker was basically the Bernie Madoff of his day, and he did it to an entire country. So, yes: he was a distaster. A complete, utter, unmitigated disaster.
 
Last edited:
So, if we let Mirabeau form a ministry sans Necker - I'm not sure what Mirabeau's exact stance on him was - who might be a financially-minded person to fill that portfolio (finances) in his ministry?
 
So, if we let Mirabeau form a ministry sans Necker - I'm not sure what Mirabeau's exact stance on him was - who might be a financially-minded person to fill that portfolio (finances) in his ministry?

Ironically, Calonne would have been perfect for the job. Formerly as bad as Necker, he had since completely reversed his stance and had a sound plan for reform. But he had been exiled because these reforms were vastly impopular with the aristocracy. The revolutionary era would have been the time to implement them quickly and without too much resistance. But when Calonne attempted to return to France in 1789, in the hope of offering himself for election to the Estates-General, he was forbidden to enter the country. Embittered, he joined the émigré faction.

Come to think of it: allowing him back in the country, and having him form an alliance with Mirabeau while exposing Necker for the fraud he truly is, could be a perfect POD for your scenario.
 
Ironically, Calonne would have been perfect for the job. Formerly as bad as Necker, he had since completely reversed his stance and had a sound plan for reform. But he had been exiled because these reforms were vastly impopular with the aristocracy. The revolutionary era would have been the time to implement them quickly and without too much resistance. But when Calonne attempted to return to France in 1789, in the hope of offering himself for election to the Estates-General, he was forbidden to enter the country. Embittered, he joined the émigré faction.

Come to think of it: allowing him back in the country, and having him form an alliance with Mirabeau while exposing Necker for the fraud he truly is, could be a perfect POD for your scenario.

So, Mirabeau as president/prime minister, Calonne as finance minister, I remember reading in the first biography on Louis XVI I read, that it was a case of many hoped for a reign of peace, because none of the marechaux des France he appointed shortly after his coronation had ever even fought in a war.

So, might Lafayette get the post of ministere de Guerre - or would that be counterproductive to Mirabeau's ministry, also ministère de la Marine is still vacant, maybe a revitalizing mariner there who brings France's navy back up to scratch (IDK who, my knowledge of the French navy is borderline at best). And what effects might we see on the future of the French monarchy
 
So, Mirabeau as president/prime minister, Calonne as finance minister, I remember reading in the first biography on Louis XVI I read, that it was a case of many hoped for a reign of peace, because none of the marechaux des France he appointed shortly after his coronation had ever even fought in a war.

So, might Lafayette get the post of ministere de Guerre - or would that be counterproductive to Mirabeau's ministry, also ministère de la Marine is still vacant, maybe a revitalizing mariner there who brings France's navy back up to scratch (IDK who, my knowledge of the French navy is borderline at best). And what effects might we see on the future of the French monarchy

For the navy, I'd recommend Louis-René Le Vassor, the count of La Touche-Tréville. Napoleon believed, not without cause, that this man's death (und thus him not being present at Trafalgar) was why the French lost to Nelson.

Based on who Mirabeau wanted in his government IOTL, it would look something like this:

-Prime minister: Mirabeau
-Finance: Colonne
-War: La Fayette
-Navy: La Touche-Tréville
-Foreign Affairs: Louis Philippe, the count of Ségur

Furthermore, in pretty much interchangable positions:

-The count of La Marck
-The duke of La Rochefoucauld
-The duke of Liancourt
-Jean Joseph Mounier
-Isaac Le Chapelier

In addition, Mirabeau IOTL wanted Talleyrand for bishop of Autun, and Target for mayor of Paris.
 
Top