WI the Dauphin doesn't die in 1789

Louis Joseph, the seven year old son of Louis XVI, happened to die on June 4, 1789, right in the middle of the meeting of the Estates General; the king, naturally enough, was wracked with grief. It was in his absence that the Third Estate declared itself the "National Assembly"; and it was a still grieving Louis who tried to disperse them, leading to the Tennis Court Oath, and from there, and who gave a less than diplomatic speech trying to get the Estates General back on track, only to be defied by the emboldened delegates.

So supposing the prince had not died at such a delicate moment (surviving at least another few months)? How is the course of the French Revolution changed (or is it still a revolution)? And how is history affected from there?
 
Interesting scenario. I'm no expert on the Revolution but my gut feeling is that it would have happened regardless of whether or not the Dauphin survived. If it did then, assuming the royal children were not smuggled out of France at the outset then the poor boy probably would have died in prison like his unfortunate younger brother.
 
Not sure the Revolution could really be avoided. That being said, a Louis XVI that wouldn't have lost his son probably would be in a better mental state and would thus be a bit more open to discussing with the Third Estate deputés.

Still, even in a better mental state, I'm not sure Louis XVI could handle the situation. He was a gentle soul with a real care for his people, but he lacked certain qualities needed to make a good king. And while he wasn't completely incompetent, he still had been ill prepared to rule and was facing a change the likes had never be seen in France before...
 
Top