What do you think?
Rate this book
When the King Took Flight
On a June night in 1791, King Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette fled Paris in disguise, hoping to escape the mounting turmoil of the French Revolution. They were arrested by a small group of citizens a few miles from the Belgian border and forced to return to Paris. Two years later they would both die at the guillotine. It is this extraordinary story, and the events leading up to and away from it, that Tackett recounts in gripping novelistic style.
The king's flight opens a window to the whole of French society during the Revolution. Each dramatic chapter spotlights a different segment of the population, from the king and queen as they plotted and executed their flight, to the people of Varennes who apprehended the royal family, to the radicals of Paris who urged an end to monarchy, to the leaders of the National Assembly struggling to control a spiraling crisis, to the ordinary citizens stunned by their king's desertion. Tackett shows how Louis's flight reshaped popular attitudes toward kingship, intensified fears of invasion and conspiracy, and helped pave the way for the Reign of Terror.
Tackett brings to life an array of unique characters as they struggle to confront the monumental transformations set in motion in 1789. In so doing, he offers an important new interpretation of the Revolution. By emphasizing the unpredictable and contingent character of this story, he underscores the power of a single event to change irrevocably the course of the French Revolution, and consequently the history of the world.
The king's flight opens a window to the whole of French society during the Revolution. Each dramatic chapter spotlights a different segment of the population, from the king and queen as they plotted and executed their flight, to the people of Varennes who apprehended the royal family, to the radicals of Paris who urged an end to monarchy, to the leaders of the National Assembly struggling to control a spiraling crisis, to the ordinary citizens stunned by their king's desertion. Tackett shows how Louis's flight reshaped popular attitudes toward kingship, intensified fears of invasion and conspiracy, and helped pave the way for the Reign of Terror.
Tackett brings to life an array of unique characters as they struggle to confront the monumental transformations set in motion in 1789. In so doing, he offers an important new interpretation of the Revolution. By emphasizing the unpredictable and contingent character of this story, he underscores the power of a single event to change irrevocably the course of the French Revolution, and consequently the history of the world.
288 pages, Paperback
First published March 14, 2003
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 56 reviews
August 4, 2026
The book investigates the French royal family's attempt to flee Paris for the eastern frontier in June 1791. After being forced to leave Versailles by an angry mob and national guardsmen, Louis XVI, his wife, and their two children had been living almost as captives in the palace of the Tuileries. Louis presided over the festivities commemorating the first anniversary of the fall of the Bastille and swore an oath of allegiance to the constitution. He visited the National Assembly and appeared to reconcile with the revolutionary reforms and accept the abolition of the old privileges. Many believed that Louis could be a good constitutional monarch. Many patriot deputies wanted to believe in the king's sincerity, for they intended to strengthen the monarchy, seeing it as a bulwark against popular violence. But they were mistaken, as subsequent events would prove. In reality, the king never accepted the Revolution. He wanted to restore his royal power and control over the country. Louis probably believed that an oath sworn under duress did not compromise his conscience. While the king could be well-intentioned and pious, he also mastered dissimulation during the tumultuous months preceding his flight.
By the time Louis decided to take flight, he may have felt completely disillusioned. This occurred shortly after the death of Mirabeau, who had supported the transition to a constitutional monarchy and was in contact with the king.
Marie Antoinette and some of the king's advisors had repeatedly urged Louis to distance himself from Paris with its "fanatical" newspapers and "extremist" mobs, but he refused. When he finally agreed to leave the capital, valuable time had already been lost.
What finally convinced the king, who was often indecisive and lacked self-confidence, to make such a drastic decision after so much dithering? It was most likely the feeling of personal danger to the king himself and his family that persuaded him to attempt an escape. Events that the monarch perceived as humiliations followed one another. One such event occurred when the royal carriage was blocked by the mob, preventing it from leaving the Tuileries. The king and his family had intended to spend Easter at their estate in the countryside, but this was denied to them.
Louis himself justified his clandestine escape by claiming that he lived in constant danger in Paris, surrounded by bayonets and daggers.
By the time the royal family left Paris, the country had become radicalized. The king should have acted earlier. Even in 1791, however, they could have succeeded if they had chosen a different strategy or had more luck. Suppose the king and the queen had agreed to travel separately. What if they had chosen a less conspicuous carriage? What if they had not continually postponed their departure? What if they had had a better understanding of people's sentiments? But Louis XVI was convinced that only Paris and its people were infected by radical Jacobin ideas and prone to violence. He believed that French men and women outside the capital remained loyal to him and would be happy to help him regain the greater part of his former royal powers. The king had some reason to think this way, as he had enjoyed popularity with different segments of society before his failed escape. Despite all the changes, he was still greeted with the traditional "Long live the king!" He was called "the father of the nation" and "the restorer of French liberty." Expressions of sympathy toward the king stopped after the royal family was returned to Paris. From that moment on, many people grew hostile toward the king. They were disillusioned and enraged by what they perceived as his treachery. This demonstrates the fickle nature of public opinion, which can change very rapidly.
However, in his belief that people outside of Paris were staunch royalists, Louis was wrong. As a side note, the French king's attitude resembles that of Nicholas II of Russia, who also believed that ordinary Russians - peasants in the countryside, the "real people" - supported the tsar.
More than two years had passed since the beginning of the French Revolution, and profound changes had occurred not only in major cities, but also in the countryside and small towns. Patriotic clubs emerged across the country in 1790-91. They played a significant role in shifting public opinion. Because of these transformations, the king, the queen, and their children were stopped in Varennes, a small town on the fringe of northeastern France, close to the border. The local officials, who initially seemed inclined to cooperate with the king, would finally reject their plea to let them go. Local dignitaries and ordinary people had constantly been warned about conspiracies, counterrevolutionary activities, and the danger of foreign invasion. Suspicion was in the air. They realized that they could not allow the king to travel so dangerously close to the border. They could easily imagine Louis crossing into the Austrian Netherlands and strengthening the forces hostile to the Revolution.
Their fears were not ungrounded. Louis declared his intention to reach the stronghold of Montmédy, where he would negotiate a new settlement with the Assembly. Although he probably did not plan to leave French soil, there was a possibility that Marie Antoinette and others would convince him to travel to Austrian territory for his safety. This would likely lead to a civil war, causing inevitable suffering for the people, and no one could predict the outcome for the royalists.
The stakes around the flight, as the author notes, were very high for everyone involved.
Interestingly, the royal couple was warned against taking this gamble by the Austrian ambassador, Mercy. He advised them to "wait out the storm" instead of taking such a great risk. "I tremble to think of the catastrophe that would arise if the enterprise fails," Mercy wrote.
General Bouille, one of the main architects of the royal flight, was growing increasingly doubtful of the reliability of his French troops. This led him to employ primarily German-speaking cavalrymen to protect the royal family upon their arrival, which only amplified the local people's suspicion and fear in Varennes and the surrounding areas.
Yet, it appears that the bold plan was very close to succeeding.
Marie Antoinette's close friend, Axel Fersen, conceived and orchestrated the plan for the most part. In fact, Fersen was responsible for the royal family's successful deliverance from Paris. The royal couple and their children, all in disguise, managed to slip out of the palace right under the noses of the guards and servants. This was a remarkable achievement in itself.
The king's sister, Elizabeth, traveled with the royal party. She, too, was executed during the Terror.
The flight failed. The royal couple was humiliated and exhausted by the excruciatingly slow journey back to Paris amidst the summer heat. Not only was the royal procession surrounded by guardsmen, but also by crowds of people who came to gawk at their king.
Before escaping the palace, Louis left a declaration on his desk that negatively influenced public perception of the king after Varennes. In it, he renounced the revolutionary changes and stated that his previous vows and acquiescence to the new laws had been coerced and were therefore invalid. Was Louis sure that their plan would succeed? Did the royal family not realize that they were sitting on top of a volcano? The king's letter left no doubt that Louis had not been abducted and that he had abandoned the capital of his own volition. Some might call this reckless act by the king political suicide. It produced an image of him as a "treasonous and deceitful" monarch who could hardly be trusted again. Following the Varennes episode, the ideas of "violating the rule of law to save the state from destruction" and of "the enemy within" began to gain traction. The years after the monarchy's fall would see the bloody consequences of these ideas for a great many people.
Despite the tension and ultimate failure, there were pleasant moments for the travelers. In their berline, a large, well-equipped carriage, the royal family ate a picnic breakfast with their fingers. The king pored over his maps to check out each village or relay post they passed by. Louis had always been fond of geography, but this was only the third time he had left the Paris region.
During their stops, the king chatted with the locals, as he had with laborers outside Versailles in his youth. This lack of prudence on the part of the king turned out to be a mistake.
The author suggests that the king's abortive flight and the subsequent crisis of the summer of 1791 greatly contributed to "the destabilization of the state and the society" and the spread of republican ideas among different segments of the nation. According to Timothy Tackett, the king's flight in a way initiated a republican movement in France.
While the attempted flight was undoubtedly one of the pivotal events with serious ramifications, the historian may be somewhat exaggerating its significance.
"In the spring of 1791 the deputies had been hopeful that with the completion of the constitution and the installation of a permanent new regime, the Revolutionary period would come to an end. And it is not impossible that the constitutional monarchy might have worked and eventually returned some measure of stability to the nation; it is not impossible that the period of state-sponsored violence and terror might have been avoided, if only the monarch himself, the central personage in the new system, had given his wholehearted support. At the beginning of June the majority of the French did think this was possible. The majority-especially outside Paris-continued to believe that their "citizen king" endorsed the Revolution. They continued to imagine Louis as a central father figure around whom the sovereign nation might rally."
While I agree with this passage, I think making a constitutional monarchy work would have required more than just Louis genuinely coming to accept the Revolution and his new role as a constitutional monarch with greatly reduced powers.
I would add that the outcome for the monarchy and Louis XVI might have been different if the National Assembly's deputies - who spent months debating and drafting the first constitution that transformed France into a constitutional monarchy - had had the opportunity to be elected to the new Legislative Assembly created by that same constitution. Unsurprisingly, many of those deputies, who had struggled for more than two years to perfect the constitution, described themselves as "exhausted" and "worn out" in their letters. One must have been as resilient as a gorilla to survive politically in that climate in the long term.
However, their remarkable achievement would survive only eleven months. New constitutions were adopted over the next few years. It seemed as if the country was trying to find its way through trial and error. Meanwhile, the members of the newly established National Convention were not about to relinquish their power. They feared that royalists might win a majority in both chambers if there were free elections.
The author could have elaborated more on these developments.
We know about what the royal family had to endure and about their tragic end. Many individuals suffered greatly during that period as well, but their stories and tragedies have been erased from history. Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette were concerned about their children's safety. Many families were concerned about finding bread to feed their children during a time of high prices and poor harvests.
By the time Louis decided to take flight, he may have felt completely disillusioned. This occurred shortly after the death of Mirabeau, who had supported the transition to a constitutional monarchy and was in contact with the king.
Marie Antoinette and some of the king's advisors had repeatedly urged Louis to distance himself from Paris with its "fanatical" newspapers and "extremist" mobs, but he refused. When he finally agreed to leave the capital, valuable time had already been lost.
What finally convinced the king, who was often indecisive and lacked self-confidence, to make such a drastic decision after so much dithering? It was most likely the feeling of personal danger to the king himself and his family that persuaded him to attempt an escape. Events that the monarch perceived as humiliations followed one another. One such event occurred when the royal carriage was blocked by the mob, preventing it from leaving the Tuileries. The king and his family had intended to spend Easter at their estate in the countryside, but this was denied to them.
Louis himself justified his clandestine escape by claiming that he lived in constant danger in Paris, surrounded by bayonets and daggers.
By the time the royal family left Paris, the country had become radicalized. The king should have acted earlier. Even in 1791, however, they could have succeeded if they had chosen a different strategy or had more luck. Suppose the king and the queen had agreed to travel separately. What if they had chosen a less conspicuous carriage? What if they had not continually postponed their departure? What if they had had a better understanding of people's sentiments? But Louis XVI was convinced that only Paris and its people were infected by radical Jacobin ideas and prone to violence. He believed that French men and women outside the capital remained loyal to him and would be happy to help him regain the greater part of his former royal powers. The king had some reason to think this way, as he had enjoyed popularity with different segments of society before his failed escape. Despite all the changes, he was still greeted with the traditional "Long live the king!" He was called "the father of the nation" and "the restorer of French liberty." Expressions of sympathy toward the king stopped after the royal family was returned to Paris. From that moment on, many people grew hostile toward the king. They were disillusioned and enraged by what they perceived as his treachery. This demonstrates the fickle nature of public opinion, which can change very rapidly.
However, in his belief that people outside of Paris were staunch royalists, Louis was wrong. As a side note, the French king's attitude resembles that of Nicholas II of Russia, who also believed that ordinary Russians - peasants in the countryside, the "real people" - supported the tsar.
More than two years had passed since the beginning of the French Revolution, and profound changes had occurred not only in major cities, but also in the countryside and small towns. Patriotic clubs emerged across the country in 1790-91. They played a significant role in shifting public opinion. Because of these transformations, the king, the queen, and their children were stopped in Varennes, a small town on the fringe of northeastern France, close to the border. The local officials, who initially seemed inclined to cooperate with the king, would finally reject their plea to let them go. Local dignitaries and ordinary people had constantly been warned about conspiracies, counterrevolutionary activities, and the danger of foreign invasion. Suspicion was in the air. They realized that they could not allow the king to travel so dangerously close to the border. They could easily imagine Louis crossing into the Austrian Netherlands and strengthening the forces hostile to the Revolution.
Their fears were not ungrounded. Louis declared his intention to reach the stronghold of Montmédy, where he would negotiate a new settlement with the Assembly. Although he probably did not plan to leave French soil, there was a possibility that Marie Antoinette and others would convince him to travel to Austrian territory for his safety. This would likely lead to a civil war, causing inevitable suffering for the people, and no one could predict the outcome for the royalists.
The stakes around the flight, as the author notes, were very high for everyone involved.
Interestingly, the royal couple was warned against taking this gamble by the Austrian ambassador, Mercy. He advised them to "wait out the storm" instead of taking such a great risk. "I tremble to think of the catastrophe that would arise if the enterprise fails," Mercy wrote.
General Bouille, one of the main architects of the royal flight, was growing increasingly doubtful of the reliability of his French troops. This led him to employ primarily German-speaking cavalrymen to protect the royal family upon their arrival, which only amplified the local people's suspicion and fear in Varennes and the surrounding areas.
Yet, it appears that the bold plan was very close to succeeding.
Marie Antoinette's close friend, Axel Fersen, conceived and orchestrated the plan for the most part. In fact, Fersen was responsible for the royal family's successful deliverance from Paris. The royal couple and their children, all in disguise, managed to slip out of the palace right under the noses of the guards and servants. This was a remarkable achievement in itself.
The king's sister, Elizabeth, traveled with the royal party. She, too, was executed during the Terror.
The flight failed. The royal couple was humiliated and exhausted by the excruciatingly slow journey back to Paris amidst the summer heat. Not only was the royal procession surrounded by guardsmen, but also by crowds of people who came to gawk at their king.
Before escaping the palace, Louis left a declaration on his desk that negatively influenced public perception of the king after Varennes. In it, he renounced the revolutionary changes and stated that his previous vows and acquiescence to the new laws had been coerced and were therefore invalid. Was Louis sure that their plan would succeed? Did the royal family not realize that they were sitting on top of a volcano? The king's letter left no doubt that Louis had not been abducted and that he had abandoned the capital of his own volition. Some might call this reckless act by the king political suicide. It produced an image of him as a "treasonous and deceitful" monarch who could hardly be trusted again. Following the Varennes episode, the ideas of "violating the rule of law to save the state from destruction" and of "the enemy within" began to gain traction. The years after the monarchy's fall would see the bloody consequences of these ideas for a great many people.
Despite the tension and ultimate failure, there were pleasant moments for the travelers. In their berline, a large, well-equipped carriage, the royal family ate a picnic breakfast with their fingers. The king pored over his maps to check out each village or relay post they passed by. Louis had always been fond of geography, but this was only the third time he had left the Paris region.
During their stops, the king chatted with the locals, as he had with laborers outside Versailles in his youth. This lack of prudence on the part of the king turned out to be a mistake.
The author suggests that the king's abortive flight and the subsequent crisis of the summer of 1791 greatly contributed to "the destabilization of the state and the society" and the spread of republican ideas among different segments of the nation. According to Timothy Tackett, the king's flight in a way initiated a republican movement in France.
While the attempted flight was undoubtedly one of the pivotal events with serious ramifications, the historian may be somewhat exaggerating its significance.
"In the spring of 1791 the deputies had been hopeful that with the completion of the constitution and the installation of a permanent new regime, the Revolutionary period would come to an end. And it is not impossible that the constitutional monarchy might have worked and eventually returned some measure of stability to the nation; it is not impossible that the period of state-sponsored violence and terror might have been avoided, if only the monarch himself, the central personage in the new system, had given his wholehearted support. At the beginning of June the majority of the French did think this was possible. The majority-especially outside Paris-continued to believe that their "citizen king" endorsed the Revolution. They continued to imagine Louis as a central father figure around whom the sovereign nation might rally."
While I agree with this passage, I think making a constitutional monarchy work would have required more than just Louis genuinely coming to accept the Revolution and his new role as a constitutional monarch with greatly reduced powers.
I would add that the outcome for the monarchy and Louis XVI might have been different if the National Assembly's deputies - who spent months debating and drafting the first constitution that transformed France into a constitutional monarchy - had had the opportunity to be elected to the new Legislative Assembly created by that same constitution. Unsurprisingly, many of those deputies, who had struggled for more than two years to perfect the constitution, described themselves as "exhausted" and "worn out" in their letters. One must have been as resilient as a gorilla to survive politically in that climate in the long term.
However, their remarkable achievement would survive only eleven months. New constitutions were adopted over the next few years. It seemed as if the country was trying to find its way through trial and error. Meanwhile, the members of the newly established National Convention were not about to relinquish their power. They feared that royalists might win a majority in both chambers if there were free elections.
The author could have elaborated more on these developments.
We know about what the royal family had to endure and about their tragic end. Many individuals suffered greatly during that period as well, but their stories and tragedies have been erased from history. Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette were concerned about their children's safety. Many families were concerned about finding bread to feed their children during a time of high prices and poor harvests.
February 29, 2024
i love the guillotine
(read for class)
(read for class)
February 5, 2021
Well researched and very detailed account of the royal family's ill-fated attempt to flee the country during the French Revolution, its wider context and its consequences. Engagingly written, and a worthwhile read if you're interested in the subject.
October 10, 2015
Good account of the familiar story though the style is a bit monotone and the Varennes capture of the king deserves a bit more narrative flair
August 15, 2008
A few of my classmates and I were honored to actually help our former professor with this book. I still have the draft!
July 6, 2024
4,5/5 stars
There are some events in history that not only are fascinating and have a dramatic impact of it self but have also huge repercussions on the course of history. The attempt of Louis XVI of France to flee his country in 1791 was such an event.
A lot of parts of this book are incredible written and very exciting to read. Some of the historical scenes are just so tense and full of drama : the discovery of the Royal Family by the inhabitants of Varennes or the escape of the Royal Family out the Palace de Tuileries are moments that could have come out of a novel( I would love to read a novel based on this event).
This in itself would already be interesting to read but luckily Tackett does something more in this book. By showing the consequences of this event in the following days, months, years,... , we get a overview on the next phase of the French Revolution and how it's ideology would become more radical. The affair will lead to a break of trust between Louis and a large part of the French population. Feeling betrayed, angry and humiliated , the revolutionaries will start to look for other types of government then monarchy. This book read so fast so this won't be my last by this author !
There are some events in history that not only are fascinating and have a dramatic impact of it self but have also huge repercussions on the course of history. The attempt of Louis XVI of France to flee his country in 1791 was such an event.
A lot of parts of this book are incredible written and very exciting to read. Some of the historical scenes are just so tense and full of drama : the discovery of the Royal Family by the inhabitants of Varennes or the escape of the Royal Family out the Palace de Tuileries are moments that could have come out of a novel( I would love to read a novel based on this event).
This in itself would already be interesting to read but luckily Tackett does something more in this book. By showing the consequences of this event in the following days, months, years,... , we get a overview on the next phase of the French Revolution and how it's ideology would become more radical. The affair will lead to a break of trust between Louis and a large part of the French population. Feeling betrayed, angry and humiliated , the revolutionaries will start to look for other types of government then monarchy. This book read so fast so this won't be my last by this author !
November 10, 2025
Someday I will go back and write my true review on this narrative because it truly deserves it. Timothy Tackett does an amazing job at presenting a compelling narrative with a meticulous and satisfying historiography, at least for me.
This narrative feels like King Louis XVI is the victim of some sort of time-traveling Divination Wizard with a great sense of humor. Dear reader, do you have mixed feelings with the perspectives provided by Great Man conceptions of history? Well what about Stupid Bumbling Man history? What if the thieves from Home Alone ran a country? I’m truly thankful for the Parlement of Paris punking his ass into calling an Estates-General simply for this hilarious narrative alone. This book genuinely gave me moments where I had to pause and burst out laughing because what do you mean you LEFT A LETTER DISSING THE REVOLUTION before you fled with your entire family to betray your country??? Why didn’t you use a light and inconspicuous carriage?? Why didn’t you change your appearance when you print money WITH YOUR FACE on it?? Ugh I’ve said too much already. Future Star, you know what to do
This narrative feels like King Louis XVI is the victim of some sort of time-traveling Divination Wizard with a great sense of humor. Dear reader, do you have mixed feelings with the perspectives provided by Great Man conceptions of history? Well what about Stupid Bumbling Man history? What if the thieves from Home Alone ran a country? I’m truly thankful for the Parlement of Paris punking his ass into calling an Estates-General simply for this hilarious narrative alone. This book genuinely gave me moments where I had to pause and burst out laughing because what do you mean you LEFT A LETTER DISSING THE REVOLUTION before you fled with your entire family to betray your country??? Why didn’t you use a light and inconspicuous carriage?? Why didn’t you change your appearance when you print money WITH YOUR FACE on it?? Ugh I’ve said too much already. Future Star, you know what to do
September 4, 2017
I had to read this for my history class this semester, and it was better than I was expecting. Tackett's argument is very interesting, and I enjoyed learning about the king's flight and all of its consequences in detail. I did feel like this could have been a little more interesting at parts. It felt like the author spent a ton of time on very minute details that might have been more appropriate for a footnote rather than spending more time on the big events. At the end, the second revolution, the king's trial, the Terror, and the executions all felt very rushed. They were all discussed for maybe five or six pages, but there were whole sections of chapters devoted to the exact pattern in which information about the flight and discovery spread from Paris to other towns.
August 20, 2025
A well-written narrative on the decision of King Louis and Marie Antoinette to flee France at a critical point in the Revolution. I liked the author's exploration into different topics in the various chapters: the context in Paris, the Provinces, the National Assembly, etc. Before this, I hadn't really read a history book dedicated to a very specific event but I liked the approach. Shout out to The Rest is History podcast hosts for recommending this.
September 27, 2017
Louis XVI gone done and messed up.
When a friend insisted I read this book I was hesitant to take him up on the offer. I may not be a historian but I nonetheless felt that I already knew quite a bit about the French Revolution, at least as far as the layman is concerned. What more did I really need to know about the fateful Flight to Varennes?
Tackett's decision to weave the historical into a proper narrative, though, insured that I would continue to read past the first chapter. He offered something that no other text on the Revolution I had yet read had: a dive into the thought processes of all the various actors involved in the Flight.
Beyond that, When the King Took Flight really drove home the point that on the eve of June 21, the French Revolution really was nearly complete. The constitution was nearly finalised and there was a sense of unity throughout the nascent nation of France. Now, more than before, I appreciate just how caustic to Flight to Varennes was to the French people.
I am a republican and believe that the cause of the second revolution of 1792 was just. But, I wonder: would the means have been less catastrophic if Louis XVI had been sincere in his loyalty to the constitution? Revolution, after all, can be a process and not an event. We're it not for the Flight, perhaps France could have slowly achieved a republic without the terror.
Happy year CCXXVI, citizens.
When a friend insisted I read this book I was hesitant to take him up on the offer. I may not be a historian but I nonetheless felt that I already knew quite a bit about the French Revolution, at least as far as the layman is concerned. What more did I really need to know about the fateful Flight to Varennes?
Tackett's decision to weave the historical into a proper narrative, though, insured that I would continue to read past the first chapter. He offered something that no other text on the Revolution I had yet read had: a dive into the thought processes of all the various actors involved in the Flight.
Beyond that, When the King Took Flight really drove home the point that on the eve of June 21, the French Revolution really was nearly complete. The constitution was nearly finalised and there was a sense of unity throughout the nascent nation of France. Now, more than before, I appreciate just how caustic to Flight to Varennes was to the French people.
I am a republican and believe that the cause of the second revolution of 1792 was just. But, I wonder: would the means have been less catastrophic if Louis XVI had been sincere in his loyalty to the constitution? Revolution, after all, can be a process and not an event. We're it not for the Flight, perhaps France could have slowly achieved a republic without the terror.
Happy year CCXXVI, citizens.
August 4, 2011
There's nothing better than a solid work of micro-history. You take a single event, or an unknown individual, research everything you possibly can about them, and publish a monograph. Timothy Tackett has done precisely this about one of the highest gambles of the French Revolution: the attempted flight of Louis XVI to the Austrian border in the summer of 1791.
It is Tackett's belief that the flight to Varennes represented a bridge between 2 distinct phases of the Revolution: the hopeful and the tragic. The King's decision to flee was taken late in the National Assembly's process of drafting France's first constitution; until then it had seemed Louis XVI was fully supportive of the process. His flight, however, told another story, and mobilized the French in unexpected ways that laid the foundation for the Terror of Robespierre.
Told in a fast paced narrative style and thoroughly researched, Tackett engages the reader in this seminal event in the history of the Revolution. A must read for amateur and professional historian alike.
It is Tackett's belief that the flight to Varennes represented a bridge between 2 distinct phases of the Revolution: the hopeful and the tragic. The King's decision to flee was taken late in the National Assembly's process of drafting France's first constitution; until then it had seemed Louis XVI was fully supportive of the process. His flight, however, told another story, and mobilized the French in unexpected ways that laid the foundation for the Terror of Robespierre.
Told in a fast paced narrative style and thoroughly researched, Tackett engages the reader in this seminal event in the history of the Revolution. A must read for amateur and professional historian alike.
April 22, 2011
An excellent--thorough and well written-account of the repercussions of the king's flight. I knew nothing of this except for the bare fact of it. "[I]n opting to flee from Paris at a critical moment, when the constitution was almost complete, and in repudiating his solemn oath to uphold the Revolution, the king greatly contributed to the destabilization of the state and society. In the short term, his action exerted a deeply traumatic effect on the whole population. A great wave of emotion swept across the country, emotions that ranged from crippling anxiety to outbursts of violence to chain-reaction panics over imagined invasions....They had imagined the monarch as a good father, and now they experienced a profound sense of desertion and betrayal". 221-222
Tackett makes a convincing argument-backing it up with his detailed study of letters and other texts from the time.
Tackett makes a convincing argument-backing it up with his detailed study of letters and other texts from the time.
August 3, 2018
An excellent history of the time during the French Revolution when the Royal Family tried to sneak out of Paris but were recognized and brought back. This is a pretty thorough, in-depth look at this incident and the events that led up to it, as well as what happened afterward.
The author describes the conditions that led the French King and his family to try to leave the country, and the mood of the people of Paris and the French countryside that caused them to worry about their doing that. He tells the events of the period immediately after the King and Queen returned to Paris, and how, despite what at first appeared to be a period of renewed stability, this incident led more or less directly to the eventual onset of the Reign of Terror.
The author describes the conditions that led the French King and his family to try to leave the country, and the mood of the people of Paris and the French countryside that caused them to worry about their doing that. He tells the events of the period immediately after the King and Queen returned to Paris, and how, despite what at first appeared to be a period of renewed stability, this incident led more or less directly to the eventual onset of the Reign of Terror.
March 18, 2019
A very organized account of French society and government in 1791, the year that Louis XVI fled to Varennes. It was actually an interesting read, Tackett's language was simple but engaging.
November 20, 2020
Fantastic examination of the king’s flight. As a student of his, this book is by far the most thorough study of the events that led to Varenne and the ramifications of the failed attempt
October 25, 2025
Revolutions, by their revolving nature, are full of turning points. They are punctuated by moments that historians can point to and say, “The events of this day changed everything forever.” In histories of the French Revolution, the royal family’s failed Flight to Varennes is invariably presented as one of those decisive forks in the road—King Louis XVI’s crossing of the Rubicon. What Timothy Tackett does so brilliantly in this book is hold his audience in that moment, taking us beat by beat, decision by decision, through the king and queen’s desperate attempt to flee Paris in disguise in the middle of the night. The opening chapters read more like a car chase or prison break scene from a novel than a work of academic nonfiction. And even though we know how the story ends—and that we’re not supposed to sympathize with the monarchs—it’s nearly impossible not to find yourself, at least once or twice, rooting for Louis and Marie Antoinette to reach the Austrian border.
Only when they are arrested and humiliatingly hauled back to Paris does Tackett zoom out, breaking from his minute-by-minute narrative to explore the broader political context, stakes, and emotional aftermath of what just took place. If the king and queen had succeeded in escaping, it would have meant civil war. When they failed, it permanently ruined the monarchy’s reputation. On June 20, most people still loved the king, even if they thought he was an idiot. He was their idiot. Their bon papa, the “good father” of the nation. By June 25, nearly everyone hated him and detested him as a liar, a traitor, and a despot. For the first time, the French began to seriously question the inevitability of kingship and the possibility of a republic. Nothing about this outcome was inevitable—and that, I think, is Tackett’s point. It’s tempting to see Varennes as an accelerant of forces already in motion, but reading this book makes clear that the event was truly transformational. It set France and Europe on a drastically different course than if it had never happened. That’s Tackett’s thesis, and he defends it convincingly. When the King Took Flight is entertaining, insightful, and an essential read for anyone interested in this period of history.
Only when they are arrested and humiliatingly hauled back to Paris does Tackett zoom out, breaking from his minute-by-minute narrative to explore the broader political context, stakes, and emotional aftermath of what just took place. If the king and queen had succeeded in escaping, it would have meant civil war. When they failed, it permanently ruined the monarchy’s reputation. On June 20, most people still loved the king, even if they thought he was an idiot. He was their idiot. Their bon papa, the “good father” of the nation. By June 25, nearly everyone hated him and detested him as a liar, a traitor, and a despot. For the first time, the French began to seriously question the inevitability of kingship and the possibility of a republic. Nothing about this outcome was inevitable—and that, I think, is Tackett’s point. It’s tempting to see Varennes as an accelerant of forces already in motion, but reading this book makes clear that the event was truly transformational. It set France and Europe on a drastically different course than if it had never happened. That’s Tackett’s thesis, and he defends it convincingly. When the King Took Flight is entertaining, insightful, and an essential read for anyone interested in this period of history.
June 26, 2025
When the King Took Flight is a book written by Timothy Tackett and published in 2003.
In this work, the author explains the escape of King Louis XVI, but not only that.
When the King Took Flight is a historical work, but the introduction is reminiscent of an adventure book with the epic tale of the king's escape on June 20 and 21, 1791. This choice to recount the escape from Varennes in an incredible manner is wise because it piques the reader's curiosity and makes them want to know more about this major incident of the eighteenth century.
Regarding the escape itself, it is important to acknowledge the many details provided by Timothy Tackett. We learn, for example, that Louis XVI owned a special vehicle, discreet inside but equipped with a leather chamber pot, emphasizing the discrepancy between the event and the character. The amount of detail provided by the author makes this book a true investigative work. Likewise, the author's thoroughness highlights the elements we know, but also those we assume or even ignore, given the significant complexity surrounding this event.
For the book doesn't focus solely on the king's flight. It also addresses the particular period preceding the flight, the flight itself, and its consequences. As an exceptional specialist in the French Revolution, Timothy Tackett brilliantly tells this troubled period in French and European history, marking the beginning of the modern period. When the King Took Flight is not a book about events, but a book about issues, allowing us to truly immerse ourselves in this exceptional era.
In conclusion, When the King Took Flight is an essential book for understanding the flight of King Louis XVI, but also the highly complex context of this incredible event.
In this work, the author explains the escape of King Louis XVI, but not only that.
When the King Took Flight is a historical work, but the introduction is reminiscent of an adventure book with the epic tale of the king's escape on June 20 and 21, 1791. This choice to recount the escape from Varennes in an incredible manner is wise because it piques the reader's curiosity and makes them want to know more about this major incident of the eighteenth century.
Regarding the escape itself, it is important to acknowledge the many details provided by Timothy Tackett. We learn, for example, that Louis XVI owned a special vehicle, discreet inside but equipped with a leather chamber pot, emphasizing the discrepancy between the event and the character. The amount of detail provided by the author makes this book a true investigative work. Likewise, the author's thoroughness highlights the elements we know, but also those we assume or even ignore, given the significant complexity surrounding this event.
For the book doesn't focus solely on the king's flight. It also addresses the particular period preceding the flight, the flight itself, and its consequences. As an exceptional specialist in the French Revolution, Timothy Tackett brilliantly tells this troubled period in French and European history, marking the beginning of the modern period. When the King Took Flight is not a book about events, but a book about issues, allowing us to truly immerse ourselves in this exceptional era.
In conclusion, When the King Took Flight is an essential book for understanding the flight of King Louis XVI, but also the highly complex context of this incredible event.
December 13, 2023
Wow, Louis was not that bright of a guy. Seems like he easily could have basically become a president for life and France's number one celebrity. But instead he lied about his oaths and then left a document explaining how much he disliked the constitution.
If he hadn't tried to escape he would have continued on being this beloved father of the country. If he hadn't left his document denouncing the constitution, he could have controlled the narrative a bit more and not lost so much respect.
And then such a disregard for the people of France. Would the new constitution have lasted longer if there was a strong king to lead his people into this new form of government? If George Washington had died in his first term, and political infighting gone unchecked, would the USA have had a similar experience to the Terror? Of course civil war and counter revolution could happen regardless, but people seemed excited for the future on the eve of Louis' attempted escape.
This book raised so many questions in the best way possible. And it was also terrifying to read. I have so little hope for the future. So many things from the past that are repeating themselves.
If he hadn't tried to escape he would have continued on being this beloved father of the country. If he hadn't left his document denouncing the constitution, he could have controlled the narrative a bit more and not lost so much respect.
And then such a disregard for the people of France. Would the new constitution have lasted longer if there was a strong king to lead his people into this new form of government? If George Washington had died in his first term, and political infighting gone unchecked, would the USA have had a similar experience to the Terror? Of course civil war and counter revolution could happen regardless, but people seemed excited for the future on the eve of Louis' attempted escape.
This book raised so many questions in the best way possible. And it was also terrifying to read. I have so little hope for the future. So many things from the past that are repeating themselves.
Read
April 3, 2023I have been wanting to read #whenthekingtookflight by #timothytackett for many years and was not disappointed. It is a terrific account of Louis XVI’s attempt to escape France in 1791. Each chapter examines the event from a different perspective: the town in which the king was stopped, the king and his immediate family, the citizens of a Paris, the politicians and influential revolutionary types and the citizens of France more generally. It is quite a dramatic depiction but cleverly provides specific detail of this surprisingly impactful turning-point while simultaneously considering the wider historical context and subsequent outcomes/consequences.
February 16, 2022
Another book for class-- the content was actually very interesting and I learned a lot about the motivations of the French Revolution. However, I cannot count how many times I feel asleep while reading this book because reading it wasn't that interesting even though the content was. Would not recommend unless you love French history or have nothing but time on your hands to read really specific books.
April 9, 2024
A really interesting and approachable look at Louis XVI's Flight to Varennes. It's written kind of like a novel which made it for a fun read. Overall Tackett is very convincing in his argument that the violence of the later period of the Revolution was not inherent, but that it was events like the King's flight earlier in the Revolution that radicalized people and laid the groundwork for the Terror.
August 30, 2026
An outstanding book, and a great introductory read for anyone wanting to get initiated into the French Revolution. Tackett is obviously an expert on the matter and he successfully makes the case that it was the attempted flight of the royal family in 1791 that ultimately signaled to turning point of the revolution. Nothing would be the same after that.
Tackett’s account of the escape reads like a thriller and keeps the reader going for just one more page to see what happens next.
Tackett’s account of the escape reads like a thriller and keeps the reader going for just one more page to see what happens next.
February 4, 2017
Great history book! Reads like a thriller, but also teaches a lot about both the facts and consequences of an important episode in European history. The plot is fast-paced and the characters are engaging.
Want to Read
December 9, 2024___________________________________
FROM BOOK: Un nuovo mondo inizia: La storia della Rivoluzione francese (Jeremy D. Popkin)
FROM BOOK: Un nuovo mondo inizia: La storia della Rivoluzione francese (Jeremy D. Popkin)
September 15, 2018
Definitely explained very well the importance of the king's flight to Varennes to the arc of the French Revolution, but often lingered on minutiae at the expense of more significant details.
February 26, 2020
Really good stuff.
November 7, 2022
Learning about the French revolution is not something I thought I would enjoy. A great book that reminded me of many of the events that happened during the Arab spring.
September 23, 2023
Read pages 49-87, 219-223
Read
September 29, 2023no cuz the way i wasnt supposed to read the whole thing today…crazy…the book was fun doe! for one of my history class
September 2, 2025
idk that the length of this was truly necessary but it is interesting to wonder how the revolution would’ve changed had Louis XVI been a reliable monarch. guess we’ll never know 🥀
Displaying 1 - 30 of 56 reviews