If the French King and his wife escaped how much would that change France. Would it make 'the terror' less severe?
Would it change the image of Revolutionary France?
Would it change the image of Revolutionary France?
WI Louis 16 and Marie Antoinette escaped
- Thread starter Derek Jackson
- Start date
I personally doubt it would have much effect on the course of the Revolutionary Wars themselves. The Vendée uprising being the most noteworthy exception - and, to my information, they didn't even officially declare for an individual dynasty -, monarchists were unable to inspire large-scale rebellion in France proper. Keep in mind the royal family and nobility were generally despised, and most French viewed the First Republic as an infinitely more desirable proposition than a return to the Ancien Régime.
In fact, a Bourbon Restoration with a senile Louis at the head could form the basis of even greater radical woe.
In fact, a Bourbon Restoration with a senile Louis at the head could form the basis of even greater radical woe.
Will Kürlich Kerl
Banned
Depending on who you have in charge of Prussia at the time, you might not have Prussia going to war against revolutionary France.
Probably no huge changes, louis is 39 and dispised so if he lives in exile it's unlikey a 60 year old gets the nod to come back, especially as he helped make the mess and was easilly the most hated man in france.
He might live to see restoration, but his survival may prove an issue for royalists, come 1814, dead he's a martyr, alive he's an incompetent king (at best) or a monster (at worst).
The french might chose to accept Napoleon II instead, though the allies are unlikely to accept anything other than the bourbon restoration. Still if Louis lives and is assosiated with whoever returns to the throne (especially if he tries to retake it himself) it may harm the royalist position, and they get the final boot long before 1830.
In terms of exile location, i assume London, it's the closest safe location from Paris and also out of the fireing line of revolutionary troops who want him dead. We'll assume the family somehow escapes, makes the coast and gets the hell out of france.
In terms of the war, little changes, louis has a 0% approval rating so he won't be inspiring any uprisings, and by the time France goes looking for terms (briefly) in 1802 they have another ruler who'll likely be content to let him rot in London. The French probably will remind people that the hated king is in London anytime they need to whip up hatred on britain. Still by this point the latest cycle of anglo-french bloodlettings been going on for over a hundred years, so its not like the french needed to many excuses.
He might live to see restoration, but his survival may prove an issue for royalists, come 1814, dead he's a martyr, alive he's an incompetent king (at best) or a monster (at worst).
The french might chose to accept Napoleon II instead, though the allies are unlikely to accept anything other than the bourbon restoration. Still if Louis lives and is assosiated with whoever returns to the throne (especially if he tries to retake it himself) it may harm the royalist position, and they get the final boot long before 1830.
In terms of exile location, i assume London, it's the closest safe location from Paris and also out of the fireing line of revolutionary troops who want him dead. We'll assume the family somehow escapes, makes the coast and gets the hell out of france.
In terms of the war, little changes, louis has a 0% approval rating so he won't be inspiring any uprisings, and by the time France goes looking for terms (briefly) in 1802 they have another ruler who'll likely be content to let him rot in London. The French probably will remind people that the hated king is in London anytime they need to whip up hatred on britain. Still by this point the latest cycle of anglo-french bloodlettings been going on for over a hundred years, so its not like the french needed to many excuses.
It is probable that Britain, in the pre-Bonaparte stage, at any rate, would be less implacably opposed to the new regime.The murder of Louis had too much resonance to the Royal Martyr for England ever to accept any accommodation with the murderers.
Remove the regicide and the British might have reconciled themselves to the new regime. It would have been unlikely though if that regime were still shrieking 'death to all kings everywhere', so this probably only applies if the PoD is a more balanced revolutionary regime, not if Louis and family simply escape somehow.
Remove the regicide and the British might have reconciled themselves to the new regime. It would have been unlikely though if that regime were still shrieking 'death to all kings everywhere', so this probably only applies if the PoD is a more balanced revolutionary regime, not if Louis and family simply escape somehow.
Hmm yes if it turned into a 20th century anti-monarchy revolution like Germany in 1918, with Louis deposed and told to get gone, then they might be prepared to accept things. On the other hand you still need to keep the revolution from devolving into the terror.
If it's just that the flight to varennes succeeds (and becomes the flight to Austria or the flight to London) then the fact that aristocrat heads are still being chopped off in wholesale lots (not something the noble houses of Europe are likely to be happy about), and the French army is attacking everyone in sight, then yeah war is still coming.
If it's just that the flight to varennes succeeds (and becomes the flight to Austria or the flight to London) then the fact that aristocrat heads are still being chopped off in wholesale lots (not something the noble houses of Europe are likely to be happy about), and the French army is attacking everyone in sight, then yeah war is still coming.
Mmmm... Varennes predates the terror and even the september massacre and may well have been a pre-condition for them, at least in their OTL form and justification. So successfull Royal flight may change this.
And at that point, the French army was desperately trying to defend its country against attacks from 'everyone in sight', coming to kill and burn (wee Brunswick proclamation).
Of course if the family escapes that probably means that the Dauphin also survives - or even if he doesn't they might still have another son. In this event 1815 sees the return of a 30yo Louis XVII instead of an elderly Louis XVIII.
Could make a difference, and certainly anything that excludes Charles X can only be good..
Could make a difference, and certainly anything that excludes Charles X can only be good..
Assuming Louis and Marie made it to Britain, would first hand exposure to the two of them make the British establishment less hostile to the revolution? A gormless prat is less inflamatory than a martyr, but I've seen to much propoganda about the two of them to have much idea about what they were really like.
I don't think they were that bad. Just the absolutely wrong personalities at the wrong time. (can you imagine Louis XI instead of Louis XVI, or Marie of Medicis instead of Marie-Antoinette? LOL, the revolution would be diverted to serve royal power over the nobles)
Vareenes broke french loyality to the king, and set in motion the events that followed. Up until then louis was seen as personally good but with evil advisors, once it became clear he'd broken with the revolution that gave the push that let the republicans take control and from there its a very short hop to the jacobin disaster. If anything the king getting away will make people even more angry, and may lead to a worse terror (especially if he flees to somewhere at war with france, making him and his supporters not only counter revolutionaries, but traitors in french eyes).
As to the start of the wars, the french were precieved trying to export the revolution and the european powers tried to stop it, only to have a bit of an oh shit moment, when the french started to win and take over europe (thankfully the worst of the terror was over by the time that happened). Naturally the powers of europe were none to pleased about this. Sorry if i wasn't clear.
Louis wasn't that bad since every decision he made while in power following his detention in Paris (when he was depressed) was sort of at least in the right direction. Given someone who's got a stronger will it might be a little more difficult to wring concessions from him.
The problem of Louis XVI was that he was forever dithering, supporting one faction one day, another the next, never willing to take harsh decisions and stick to it and putty in the hands of the last one to talk to him (last one is a slight exageration, but you get the picture). That way, he managed to alienate all the factions and have the support of none really, because none count count on him.
Choosing one path and sticking to it would have worked in the situation he was in, whatever the path he chose, even if he went for despotism, as long as he was going to back it to the full (that may have included a whiff of grapeshot). He was unable or unwilling to do this.
So, in my opinion, the worst possible character for that time.
what if louis oes not escape at all. If he stays put and does not flee then I doubt he would be executed since lafayette and the moderate would be in a greatear position of power than otl. After all him escaping and being caught gave robiespierre and the radicals the perfect excuse to get rid of him. But if he stays put then I see lafayette and his faction through butterflies emerge the dominant force over robiespierre. At the same time if the French army doesnt do as well as otl in the wars against the european powers perhaps that would lead to
the moderates negotiating with britain a peace treaty and institution of constitutional monarchy. This would then remove english support for the war. Problem is would Louis ever accept being a constitutional monarch?
the moderates negotiating with britain a peace treaty and institution of constitutional monarchy. This would then remove english support for the war. Problem is would Louis ever accept being a constitutional monarch?