How far do you with the view that the flight to Varennes fatally damaged the prospects of successfully

implementing a constitutional monarchy in France 1791 92 ? If the flight to Varennes was indeed the death sentence for the constitution is argued differently in each source however all three sources do attribute the flight with some importance. Source 1 considers the flight to Varennes to be of high importance since it was directly responsible for the outbreak of war and therefore the failing of constitutional monarchy. Source 2 places no blame on the flight on the fall of Louis as a constitutional monarchist and focuses on the war. Source 3 deems that was in fact that it was the consequences of not listening to the demands of the radicals such as the Jacobins that caused a republic. Since it was war that ended constitutional monarchy then the flight to Varennes can be seen as a lethal since it was the direct factor that led to war. Sources 1 and 3 both attribute the failure of implementing constitutional monarchy to Louis' flight to Varennes in 1791. Source 1 holds the idea that the consequences of the flight such as an increase in popular protest and popularity for a republic damaged the constitution. Through fleeing, Louis was seen as a liar and backstabber as many had believed he was a supporter of the constitution of 1789 but this idea was discredited in the declaration where he renounced the Revolution. This resulted in a decline in popularity for the King and increase in support for a republic. Source 3 describes the lack of action taken against Louis as an immediate cause in the increase in the idea that the Assembly planned to restore absolute monarchy. This too increased want for a system of government were a monarch was not needed. In addition all three sources give importance to foreign intervention in damaging the prospects of successfully implementing a constitutional monarchy. Both sources 1 and 2 use war as reasons why the King lost his remaining power with source 1 linking the impact of war with a decrease in the support for Louis and support for a monarchy. Whereas source 2 simply states that it was war that destroyed the agreement of 1789 and therefore constitutional but does not elaborate how. It does however state that the flight of Varennes was not terminal for the constitution and would recover. Source 3 however briefly touches upon the threat of foreign intervention and the consequences of such acts. Louis' lack of success in escaping forced the Emperor to take action and the result was the declaration of Pillnitz in which it was clearly outlined that Louis absolute monarchy power was to be restored and that the Austrians would use force if necessary to bring this about, thus fatally damaging constitutional monarchy. The Champs de Massacre was of direct result from the flight of Varennes. The extremists would only be satisfied with the King's removal. Source 3 also emphases the significance of the threat of foreign invasion in increasing the challenge to the constitution of 1791. The situation in Paris in and in bringing about a republic. However neither sources 1 or 2 as well as source 3 place any importance on Louis' characteristics and his actions which was important in causing the failure of constitutional monarchy. Louis' vetoing the laws passed by the Assembly on June 19th led to demands for greater democracy shown by the armed journe of the sans-culottes a day later. as a direct result of this journe "passive citizens" were admitted into the sectional assembly and a likelihood of a republic increased.

All three sources state that there were some attempts to keep Louis' power as a constitutional monarchist thus implying that the constitution was damaged but not beyond repair. furthermore the fact that the King was in power for a further year following this event adds to this idea. However since it was the flight of Varennes that caused the war, the flight can be seen as fatal to the constitution of 1789