The Fronde has the king

the Britannica 2008 article on Marshal Turenne said:
A few days later his courageous and clear-sighted action in blocking the bridge at Jargeau saved the young king Louis XIV from capture by the rebels; and in April, at Bléneau, he checked Condé and rescued his defeated colleague, Marshal d'Hocquincourt (Charles de Monchy).

This was in 1652. WI Louis had been captured?
 
I don't think the Fronde had the Cromwellian mettle, for good or ill, so most likely the young king will live. He would be humiliated, though, and quite probably be forced to subject to the paternal supervision and gentle corrections of a council of nobles. Given his upbringing and personality, that is an explosive mix, but instead of France tearing much of Europe apart, we may see it turning on itself as the king seizes the first opportunity to crush the noble rebels. There are enough loyalists and true believers in Absolutist principle to make the proposition viable. Ouch.
 
What? That rather calls for a yay :D

Of course, without the French example, absolutism in general wont get such a standing in Europe, most like, resulting in most of its states becoming/remaining very weak...

Because without the French example Europe's royal rulers would lose their will to rule their territory as completely as possible? I have more faith in their general power-hunger than that . . .
 

Susano

Banned
Because without the French example Europe's royal rulers would lose their will to rule their territory as completely as possible? I have more faith in their general power-hunger than that . . .

Of course they will try to centralsie power regardless - at that point, the struggl ebetween moanrch and estates is pretty much centuries old in every european state. Nontheless, Louis XIV gave that some sort of ideological impetus, I would say...
 
Top