AHC: Louis XVII, King of the French

What if France stayed a monarchy after the trial and execution of citizen Louis Capet? And What if the young Dauphine, Louis XVII, was crowned King of the French? (BTW Marie-Antionette has to survive. Perhaps she had been the main witness for the persecution in the trial?)
 
What if France stayed a monarchy after the trial and execution of citizen Louis Capet? And What if the young Dauphine, Louis XVII, was crowned King of the French? (BTW Marie-Antionette has to survive. Perhaps she had been the main witness for the persecution in the trial?)

You'd need a different sequence of events concerning the capture of Louis....heck, you'd need an entirely different French Revolution, IMHO.
 
Why does she have to survive? She was widely perceived as being the cause of the French state's money problems due to her personal spending and the fact she was Austrian didn't help.

And although she had a rather dignified exit (telling her son not to seek revenge, apparently), she was still trying to get the Austrians to intervene in the French Revolution even before it reached the "end the monarchy entirely" stage. Even if the Revolutionaries were willing to let bygones be bygones re: necklaces and dresses, she was basically committing treason there.
 
Actually her spending was widely exagerated and based in part on her behaviour (which was actually encouraged by the French court) as Dauphine rather than as Queen. Her and Louis did curtail their spending in later years and the biggest problem was the lack of willingness on behalf of the rest of the Royal Family to curtail their lifestyles and spending particularly the King's brothers.
 
Antoinette wouldnt have lived much longer than her beheading even if she doesn't take a ride in a tumbril/marry the widow. Evidence shows she had uterine cancer (albeit probably exacerbated by her imprisonment) that in the days before chemo was a death sentence.

Besides, what good would it do to let her survive? She would bring her son up to be "more royalist than the king, more Catholic than the pope" because of what the French did to her husband. And she wouldn't take the stand as witness for the prosecution, even if they offered her immunity in return. AFAIK they offered to send her back to Austria without her husband and children and sghe refused. Why the sudden change of heart?

Also, keeping her around would mean sending Maria Amalia of the Two Sicilies (Louis Philippe's OTL wife) to Paris, since it her favored choice of a daughter in law.
 

Rex Mundi

Banned
Why does she have to survive? She was widely perceived as being the cause of the French state's money problems due to her personal spending and the fact she was Austrian didn't help.

And although she had a rather dignified exit (telling her son not to seek revenge, apparently), she was still trying to get the Austrians to intervene in the French Revolution even before it reached the "end the monarchy entirely" stage. Even if the Revolutionaries were willing to let bygones be bygones re: necklaces and dresses, she was basically committing treason there.

Actually, it was the Revolutionaries who were committing treason. I mean, that's kind of obvious.
 
How would you let Louis XVII survive in any case? He reportedly died of scrofula that was probably, much like his mother's uterine cancer, exacerbated by his imprisonment.

You would need to avoid the entire Temple imprisonment altogether, which would mean the survival of not only Louis XVI, but also the archconservative Madame Elisabeth (she was apparently as conservative as the Comte d'Artois).

Also, the laws about a regency had been changed between the return of the royal family to Paris and Louis XVI's execution. Antoinette would not have been regent according to these laws, since the regency was vested in the senior prince of the blood, on condition of his being resident in France.

So, let's look at this. The Comte de Provence and the Comte d'Artois were already over the border; next prince du sang is noneother than Philippe Egalité, then his three sons, Chartres, Montpensier and Beaujolais (scarcely much older than Madame Royale herself). Then was the Prince de Condé (who was in his late 50s-early 60s, over the border), the Duc de Bourbon (roughly the same age as Egalité, over the border), and the Duc d'Enghien (over the border); and finally the Prince de Conti (born in 1734 and living in France).

Could turn interesting if Provence or Artois were to return to Paris to take up the regency.
 
How would you let Louis XVII survive in any case? He reportedly died of scrofula that was probably, much like his mother's uterine cancer, exacerbated by his imprisonment.

You would need to avoid the entire Temple imprisonment altogether, which would mean the survival of not only Louis XVI, but also the archconservative Madame Elisabeth (she was apparently as conservative as the Comte d'Artois).

Also, the laws about a regency had been changed between the return of the royal family to Paris and Louis XVI's execution. Antoinette would not have been regent according to these laws, since the regency was vested in the senior prince of the blood, on condition of his being resident in France.

So, let's look at this. The Comte de Provence and the Comte d'Artois were already over the border; next prince du sang is noneother than Philippe Egalité, then his three sons, Chartres, Montpensier and Beaujolais (scarcely much older than Madame Royale herself). Then was the Prince de Condé (who was in his late 50s-early 60s, over the border), the Duc de Bourbon (roughly the same age as Egalité, over the border), and the Duc d'Enghien (over the border); and finally the Prince de Conti (born in 1734 and living in France).

Could turn interesting if Provence or Artois were to return to Paris to take up the regency.


What about butterflying the Flight to Varennes altogether? After all, that's what cost the Royal family all their credibility in the first place. As for the regency, well if the Émigré Princes were allowed to return and if they even wanted to return to ta revolutionary country, (those are two really big ifs) then the Comte de Provence would be the best bet. I mean his own reign in OTL wasn't half bad. U mean like he would be the most likely to compromise with the revolutionary's, other than Louis XVI himself.
 
What about butterflying the Flight to Varennes altogether? After all, that's what cost the Royal family all their credibility in the first place. As for the regency, well if the Émigré Princes were allowed to return and if they even wanted to return to ta revolutionary country, (those are two really big ifs) then the Comte de Provence would be the best bet. I mean his own reign in OTL wasn't half bad. U mean like he would be the most likely to compromise with the revolutionary's, other than Louis XVI himself.

They royals didn't have much in the way of credibility to begin with; Varennes just cemented the fact in the revolutionaries' eyes that they royals couldn't be trusted.

Basically it seems like you're asking for a 'soft' French Revolution, where people's committees essentially run the country but the king retains a ceremonial role, not unlike modern European constitutional monarchies. Unfortunately I'm not entirely sure that the Bourbons of the time would be willing, or able, to make such a rapid adjustment. The royal family had been conspiring to escape for a long time, and by the same token were trying to do everything in their power to undermine the revolution and bring in their Hapsburg cousins to restore absolutist rule.
 
Top