"My respected Queen, you must exercise extreme caution when dealing with the Marquis de Lafayette. What the Marquis says may indeed have a certain truth to it, and one could argue that, overall, what he says can be considered an unassailable truth.
However, Your Majesty, you should be aware that, when it comes to deception, the truth can be more potent than lies. Often, individuals as naturally perceptive as yourself, dear Queen, can easily discern falsehoods. But the truth is different; it can be more misleading when emphasized and insinuated properly. Lafayette is a master of using the truth to deceive, a false Caesar, if you will.
'Times are changing,' 'constitutional monarchy is the future'—these words hold some merit. But what Lafayette may not have mentioned, my dear Queen, is who precisely presides over this constitutional monarchy!
Under the current constitutional monarchy, forgive my bluntness, the King is a mere hostage, lacking genuine and universal respect. I'm sure Your Majesty has noticed the various newspapers in Paris, some of them radical, like 'Friend of the People,' proclaiming the establishment of a republic, seeking to completely end Bourbon rule in France and transform it into a republic. Such theories have supporters even within the parliament. Some moderate individuals are also inclined to lean towards them. This is a perilous situation.
Why do these people make such choices? The reason is simple: the mob has displayed its power, people know they possess it and are willing to use it. But, my Queen, our King, because of his leniency, has never been willing to exert his power or even show it.
If a King, while wearing the crown, refuses to display his power, what awe does the crown inspire? Your Majesty, often, refusing to demonstrate power is nearly as ineffective as having no power.
Furthermore, Lafayette is partially correct on one point: the royalists are not entirely reliable. Forgive me, Your Majesty, but, as in 'Macbeth,' the more blood-related people are, the more they thirst for our blood. You must be cautious of them, even if they are your kin.
But, my Queen, on this matter, Lafayette still employs his usual tactics. He tells you the truth, but he never reveals the entire truth. The truth and the whole truth are entirely different. The royalists and the republicans differ fundamentally on one point: the royalists depend on the King. The King, for them, holds natural authority. They might plot against the King through conspiracies or even assassinations, but they cannot confront the King directly. The King is their natural leader, whether some of them like it or not.
As for Lafayette, my wise Queen, I call him a 'false Caesar' because he presents himself as if he has control over the army, dressed as someone who can, like Caesar, command thousands with a single word. In reality, Lafayette has no control over the army, unlike the real Caesar.
The true Caesar had a legion that had served under him for a long time, and every aspect of that legion, including logistics and officer promotions, was entirely at Caesar's discretion. Therefore, Caesar could easily command them to do anything, even march on Rome. However, Lafayette does not possess such an army. He only has so-called 'prestige.' But how can this 'prestige' compare to the legitimate authority of Your Majesty? Today, he can control the situation only because of Your Majesty's legitimate position as the King. Only when Your Majesty is under his control can he control France's army.
Currently, this 'false Caesar' is enacting 'reforms' within the army. Your Majesty, this is Lafayette's attempt to remedy his own weaknesses. If he can control Your Majesty for a long time, he might genuinely control the army one day. Then, the false Caesar can become a true Caesar. Perhaps Lafayette genuinely hopes for a constitutional monarchy, but the constitutional monarchy established in these circumstances is highly detrimental to Your Majesty. The sustainability of any agreement depends on mutual respect. The parliament has already demonstrated its power, while the King has never displayed any power. In this agreement, the parliament takes the superior position, and the King almost becomes a beggar. Such a constitutional monarchy cannot endure. In the parliament, there will always be those who seek to attract attention through more extreme means, and humiliating the King will become their most effective way to gain popularity. Eventually, they will ask, 'Why do we need a King?'
But the constitutional monarchy in England is different. The British monarchy has displayed its power in many ways, and the parliament and the King respect each other's power and interests, ensuring a stable and reliable constitutional monarchy.
My Queen, in response to your inquiry about how the royal family should navigate the current situation, I, your humble servant, offer the following suggestions.
First, both you and His Majesty should feign utmost trust in Lafayette and display submission to the parliament to lull them into complacency. However, you must also make His Majesty understand the current perilous situation. He must take action.
In my opinion, staying in Paris offers no benefit to the King or the entire royal family. So, whenever the opportunity arises, the King should leave Paris immediately for a safer location. I believe such a place should have the following characteristics:
First, it should be broadly supportive of the monarchy and the legitimate order.
Second, it should be distant from the borders, for several reasons. First, it would send a message to the entire nation that the King is not colluding with foreign powers, as claimed by the ruffians in newspapers like 'Friend of the People.' Second, it would prevent opportunistic individuals who are not genuinely loyal to the King from using foreign forces to further their interests by infiltrating the royalist faction.
Taking all these considerations into account, I personally believe that Lyon would be the most suitable location.
Your loyal servant,
Honore Gabriel Riqueti"
Honore Gabriel Riqueti is the President of the National Assembly, a staunch revolutionary leader, and one of the prominent figures of the French Revolution. He is renowned for his unwavering commitment to revolutionary ideals. If this letter to Queen Marie Antoinette were to be discovered by others, it would undoubtedly stir up a significant controversy. In actual history, after his death, Riqueti was initially honored with burial in the Pantheon for his contributions to the Revolution. However, not long after, with the arrest of the King and the discovery of his correspondence with the Queen in the palace, it was revealed that Riqueti had sided with the royal family. This led to an angry mob exhuming his remains from the Pantheon and throwing them in a trash heap.
Riqueti was known for his extravagant lifestyle and a plethora of mistresses, which strained his finances. His legitimate income was insufficient to sustain such a lifestyle. After his close friend (and benefactor), the Duke of Orleans, was exiled from France by Lafayette, Riqueti's financial situation deteriorated further. It is said that he had to resort to borrowing from Jewish moneylenders once again.
As the royal family was effectively held hostage in Paris by the National Guard, they desperately needed someone with influence in the Assembly to advocate for their interests. At this juncture, Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, a scholar and biologist with connections to the court, recommended his friend Riqueti to the Queen.
Lamarck is known for his contributions to the theory of evolution, notably publishing his "Philosophie Zoologique" in 1809. This work presented Lamarckian evolution, which posited that acquired characteristics could be inherited. Although this theory has largely been discredited, Lamarck's contributions to the field of biology remain significant.
With Lamarck's intervention, Riqueti, teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, clandestinely contacted the Queen last July after the storming of the Bastille. However, at that time, the Queen held him in contempt and dismissed his proposition as if he were an annoying fly.
But now, to win his assistance, the cost had increased substantially. It is said that the Queen prepared four checks for him, each with a face value of 250,000 livres, to secure his support. It was under Riqueti's subtle guidance that the royal family moved from the less defensible Tuileries Palace closer to the city center to the more easily escapable Saint-Cloud Palace.
"My dear, do you think what Riqueti is saying is true?" Queen Marie Antoinette inquired. However, the person she addressed as "dear" was not King Louis XVI but another man named Axelde Fersen, a Swedish nobleman. He was a member of the Swedish Riksdag and Marie Antoinette's secret lover and confidant.
"Riqueti is an extraordinarily talented and cunning man," Fersen sighed, "but precisely because of that, I wonder whether we can trust him."
"You're right," the Queen nodded. "Lafayette may lack loyalty to the King, but at least he has ideals and some boundaries. But Riqueti, he is a wretched scoundrel! I find it very hard to trust him. Moreover, if it weren't for them..."
Fersen let out a sigh; he knew that both he and the Queen were no match for Riqueti's cunning. The Queen was still haunted by the anger she felt when Riqueti had led the rebellion against the monarchy. While everyone understood that now was not the time to hold such grudges, the lingering resentment was hard to shake.