Second Reign of Terror

Would it be possible for there to be a second Reign of Terror in France after Napoleon was crowned emperor, or after the restoration?
 
Following the Second Restoration (after the Hundred Days), there was a White Terror of sorts, where those who sympathized with Napoleon were murdered; the civil government saw a purge of some 70,000 people, Napoleon's Mameluks were massacred in Marseille, Marshal Ney was brought to trial and executed, ect.
 
Yes, but I was thinking of more of a return to terror trying to restore Jacobin ideals rather than monarchist though.
 
Yes, but I was thinking of more of a return to terror trying to restore Jacobin ideals rather than monarchist though.

In that case, I don't really think so. Unless you're willing to wait, then I could see 1848 becoming more bloody if things go a certain way, especially if, say, the June Day riots are ineffectually handled by the prosivional government; then you might radicalize some groups and press them further to the left than say, the Montganards of '48, which were fairly tame compared to Robespierre's original group.
 
1848 would be a bit late, 1830 I could wait for, is there some way they could hijack the July Revolution?
 
1848 would be a bit late, 1830 I could wait for, is there some way they could hijack the July Revolution?

I don't think so. The Bonapartist party was weak at the time, and the Republicans moreso. The Chambers of the French parliament were highly supported by the populace. Given how electorate was chosen by the Bourbons restrictive suffrage laws, it's not any surprise they were highly royalist. Louis Philippe was also appointed Lieutenant-General by Charles X, giving an oppurtune chance to 'usurp' the throne so to speak.

The July Monarchy wasn't universally loved, though. It quickly faced some problems of it's own, and 1832 there was a rebellion in June that was distinctly Republican.
 
Any successful revolution has the potential to engage in revolutionary violence.

But if you are asking for a repeat of the 1793-1794 Terror you wouldn't just need the Jacobins in power again but a particular set of circumstances to encourage Terror.

The Jacobins didn't just enter into terror for the sake of it - it stemmed from their reaction to different events. The threat of external invasion, British blockade, the return of the monarchy, revolt in the Vendee, and Girondin opposition and Federalism all created a tense atmosphere in which the Committee of Public Safety could see enemies everywhere, inside and out, and needed to purge.

Whilst I'm not trying to justify it, its important to see Terror as a product of its environment. Without that you'll get violence (as I have in my timeline) but nothing as widespread and ideological as the Reign of Terror.
 
Didn't the counter-terror by the monarchy kill more people than the original reign of terror did?

Possibly, although not if you include the suppression of the Vendee (which you should), but my point was more that what defined the Terror was its ideological nature rather than just random revolutionary or counter-revolutionary violence.

Those ideological pressures, and the circumstances that fed them, would be hard to recreate post 1794.
 
Top