The French Revolution Without Robespierre

[Christian]

Going back to my old hobby here, something that I wonder about is, what if there was no Robespierre? Assuming that he didn't manage to become a deputy, it leaves one wondering about the revolution going forward without him.

Despite how connected he is to the revolution, I just feel like not much would change in the grand scheme of things. He wasn't really a prominent figure during the National Assembly, nor did he do much to prompt Louis to flee when the entire revolution itself was the cause. People give him credit for saving the Jacobin club during the fallout of Varennes and their split but I feel like someone else would've stepped up to reorganize the clubs.

Though I'm not sure if this is true, but the iconic phrase of France, Liberte, Egalite et Fraternite possibly originated from Robespierre on a speech about the National Guards, so there's a chance France might have a different phrase used in subsequent years.

 

[Roger II]

Depends I guess-do you think the Terror would have still happened at someone's hands or do you think he was in some sense essential to the purges?

 

[Christian]

Depends I guess-do you think the Terror would have still happened at someone's hands or do you think he was in some sense essential to the purges?

A common mistake nowadays is thinking that Robespierre was the only guy paranoid and full of conspiracy theories. That's not right, everyone was convinced one group or another was pulling off some sort of conspiracy behind the shadows, no one was immune to that.

 

[Roger II]

A common mistake nowadays is thinking that Robespierre was the only guy paranoid and full of conspiracy theories. That's not right, everyone was convinced one group or another was pulling off some sort of conspiracy behind the shadows, no one was immune to that.

Yea, that makes sense, I suppose there's still the question of whether that's enough to get a terror going without someone who's both paranoid and charismatic enough to enact his paranoia and robustly paranoid to an extent that he'll go beyond purging political enemies+people directly active in national politics.

 

[MAC161]

Depends I guess-do you think the Terror would have still happened at someone's hands or do you think he was in some sense essential to the purges?

Yea, that makes sense, I suppose there's still the question of whether that's enough to get a terror going without someone who's both paranoid and charismatic enough to enact his paranoia and robustly paranoid to an extent that he'll go beyond purging political enemies+people directly active in national politics.

I think one place to start would be those in Robespierre's inner circle in OTL, and expanding out to other radicals, Montagnard and not. Georges Couthon and Marat are likely out charisma-wise given paralysis and skin disease, respectively, although the latter is an appealing/disconcerting speculation, esp. regarding the Terror. Saint-Just and Jacques Hebert are also fascinating possibilities; the former might be seen as too young to lead any Robespierre-esque faction, but could potentially still be a figure near to Robespierre's level in terms of rhetoric and ambition, while the latter in a leadership capacity could take secularism and dechristianization in the Republic to even greater levels.

 

[Christian]

Honestly, in any non-Robespierre scenario, my personal preference would be letting the more obscure figures rise up to take the lead.