While Louis reorganized his armies in the dead of night, waging a clinical war on paper, the city of Paris was a tinderbox awaiting a spark. The news of the defeat in the Vendée had torn through the capital's thousand cafes, workshops, and radical section meetings, each telling more lurid and exaggerated than the last. It was no longer a tactical retreat; it was a rout, a second Agincourt, a shameful humiliation. The Parisian National Guard, the citizen-heroes of the Bastille, had not just been defeated; they had been "slaughtered by peasant fanatics," "butchered by savage priests," their tricolor cockades trampled into the mud by the forces of superstition and treason. A wave of grief, fear, and impotent rage gripped the city.
The floor of the National Assembly became the stage for this public passion. The atmosphere within the grand hall of the Salle du Manège was electric with anger and suspicion. The moderate Feuillants, Louis's allies, looked stunned and defensive. The vast, unaligned center of The Plain looked nervous, their eyes darting about, searching for a strong voice, a clear direction.
They found one in the Jacobins.
A deputy from a radical Paris section, a man named Thuriot with a powerful voice and a flair for the dramatic, took the podium. He was a minor figure, but his words had been meticulously crafted, his attack carefully aimed. He was the cannon, but Robespierre, watching silently from his seat on the high benches of the "Mountain," was the cannoneer. Thuriot did not attack the King—that would have been too direct, too treasonous, a fatal overreach. Instead, he launched a brilliant, devastating two-pronged attack on the pillars of the King's moderate constitutional monarchy.
First, he aimed his fire at Lafayette.
"Citizens! Representatives of a sovereign people!" Thuriot thundered, his voice echoing in the cavernous hall. "Our brothers, our sons—the heroes of Paris—lie dead in the fields of the Vendée! And where was their glorious General? Where was the hero of two worlds while his men were dying in the mud? Here! In Paris! Attending to the King! I ask you, is the National Guard now the King's personal bodyguard, a new Swiss Guard to protect the palace? Or is it the sacred shield of the Nation? We sent our bravest to fight for France, and their commander remained behind to guard one man!"
The accusation was a masterpiece of insinuation. It didn't accuse Lafayette of treason, but of a dereliction of duty, of prioritizing the monarch over the nation. It deftly planted a seed of suspicion and resentment against the revolution's most popular figure, framing him as a courtier, a palace general out of touch with the men he led. Murmurs of agreement rippled through the public galleries.
Then, Thuriot pivoted, aiming his second, more devastating volley at the heart of Louis's attempt to reconcile the new regime with the old faith: the constitutional clergy.
"And who are these rebels who have slaughtered our sons?" he roared, his voice trembling with manufactured rage. "They are Frenchmen, yes! Frenchmen driven to madness and treason by their priests! But I ask you, why are they so mad? Because they believe their immortal souls are in peril! And why do they believe this? Because we, in this very hall, have allowed a monstrous schism to fester! We have allowed a two-headed Church to poison France: on one side, the good priests, the patriots who have sworn their sacred oath to the Nation! And on the other, the refractory traitors, loyal only to a foreign prince in Rome, who whisper poison and counter-revolution in every confessional!"
This was the core of the Jacobin gambit. It was breathtakingly clever. Robespierre and his faction did not try to repeal Louis's Assignat policy, which was too popular and too crucial to the state's finances. Instead, they sought to radicalize it, to follow its logic to a brutal, revolutionary conclusion. If the refractory priests were the source of the rebellion, then the state had not just a right, but a duty, to crush them.
"The time for half-measures is over!" Thuriot proclaimed, his arms outstretched. "We must cleanse the sacred soil of France of this clerical poison! We must give the people clarity! Therefore, I propose a new law, a law for the salvation of the patrie!"
He then read the proposal, a document that would come to be known as the Law of Suspect Priests. It was terrifying in its vagueness and its power. It would require all clergy, on pain of losing their post and pension, to not only swear the Civic Oath, but to do so publicly in their parish church every Sunday before the assembled congregation. It was a loyalty test designed to humiliate. More chillingly, any priest who refused, or who was denounced by just two "active citizens" of his parish as preaching counter-revolution or questioning the laws of the Assembly, would be subject to immediate arrest and deportation to the penal colonies in French Guiana. Without trial.
It was a law that effectively created a new class of internal enemies, empowering private citizens to condemn a man to a death sentence in the swamps of South America based on a mere accusation. It was a tool of terror.
The debate that followed was furious. The moderates, Louis's Feuillant allies, were horrified. They rose one after another to decry the law as a violation of conscience, a betrayal of the Declaration of the Rights of Man, a step back towards the arbitrary despotism they had fought to overthrow. "This is not justice, it is a witch-hunt!" one cried. "You will turn every village in France into another Vendée!" another warned. They argued, correctly, that it would only alienate millions of devout believers and deepen the very civil war it claimed to be fighting.
But the Jacobins had the emotional momentum. They had the simple, powerful argument that resonated in a time of fear. They framed the debate perfectly, forcing a binary choice. A Jacobin speaker rose to rebut the moderates, his voice dripping with scorn. "I hear the fine sentiments of these gentlemen who worry for the delicate consciences of traitors! I ask them a simpler question: are you for the Nation, or are you for the fanatics who murder our soldiers? In this time of war, there is no middle ground! You are either with the revolution, or you are against it!"
The deputies of The Plain, the vast, marshy center of the Assembly, were terrified. They were terrified by the news of the military defeat, by the anger they could feel radiating from the streets of Paris, and by the ruthless logic of the Jacobin argument. They wanted a strong response. They wanted someone to blame. The idea of deporting the source of the problem was a seductively simple solution. One by one, they began to abandon the principled arguments of the moderates for the security of the Jacobin position.
Louis, sequestered in the Tuileries, received word of this debate from a frantic stream of messengers. Reading the draft of the proposed law, he saw the trap with perfect, horrifying clarity. The Jacobins had forged a political weapon aimed directly at the heart of his royal authority. His suspensive veto, the power he had fought so hard to create as a shield of moderation, was about to become his own guillotine.
If he vetoed the law, he would immediately be branded the "King of the Traitor Priests," Roi des Traîtres. He would confirm every suspicion the radicals had ever harbored about him: that he was a secret counter-revolutionary, that his heart was with the priests and the émigrés, that his support for the constitution was a sham. The Parisian mob, inflamed by Marat's press and Danton's oratory, could easily be provoked to storm the Tuileries. He would be choosing principle over his own physical survival.
If he let the law pass, he would be signing his name to a brutal, unjust persecution. He would be sanctioning a witch-hunt that violated every enlightened ideal he held. More pragmatically, he would be declaring war on millions of his own devoutly Catholic subjects, turning the Vendée from a regional brushfire into a national inferno.
A messenger arrived, breathless and pale, from the Assembly. The final vote had been taken. The Law of Suspect Priests had passed by a narrow, fear-driven majority. The bill, formally engrossed on vellum, was on its way to the palace. The entire Assembly, the entire nation, held its breath.
Will the King sign it into law, or will he veto it?
His HUD, anticipating the choice, flashed with two equally disastrous, mutually exclusive outcomes.
DECISION ANALYSIS: DECREE ON REFRACTORY CLERGY
OPTION 1: Sign the Law.
Popularity (Radical Factions): +25%
Popularity (Rural/Catholic Populace): -50%
Stability (Paris): +40% (Short-Term)
Probability of Wider Civil War: 80% (HIGH)
OPTION 2: Veto the Law.
Popularity (Radical Factions): -70%
Popularity (Moderate Factions): +30%
Stability (Paris): -60% (CRITICAL)
Probability of Parisian Insurrection/Attack on Palace: 75% (HIGH)
There was no good option. There was no clever third way. His perfect system of checks and balances, designed to ensure moderation, had become a political guillotine, poised to fall. He had to choose which blade would drop.
To be the first to know about future sequels and new projects, follow my official author blog: https://waystarnovels.blogspot.com/