My question pertains to the events of the French Revolution after Louis XVI's attempt to flee in 1791, specifically the conflict between the Jacobins' more moderate faction the Girondins and the more liberal group known as "The Mountain". After the sans-cullotes stormed the Kings residence on August 10, 1792 , the republic's legislature's calls for a constitutional convention seem extremely convenient, at least for "The Mountain". Not only was their base of support the exact urban mob who perpetrated the storming, but once freed from the bounds of the first French constitution through the convention "The Mountain" then began to take rather counter-revolutionary, tyrannical actions, such as Robspierre's and the Committee of Public Safety's "Red Terror", as well as the arrest of many Girondin politicians. Is it possible The Mountain's and Robespierre's actions were simply taken in the interest of consolidating their political power and an abandonment of the enlightenment ideals that started the revolution, or is this too cynical an interpretation of a legitimate divergence between the ideals of the Jacobins'?
It is actually incredibly accurate to explain the actions of the Montagnards as consolidationist.
The French Revolution must be analyzed in context. The rise of the Committee of Public Safety and Robespierre coincides, and not accidentally, with, arguably, the most uncertain period of the Revolution. With the execution of Louis, the 4-year experiment for a Constitutional Monarchy had failed. France faced enemy coalitions that were already mobilized and invading on nearly every border, and was simultaneously trying to quell internal revolts taking place in major cities and the Vendeé. To some extent these were loyalist revolts, but others were completely spontaneous protests over the lack of supplies, direction of the government, etc.
The actions of the Jacobins, the Montagnards (either the position or the party), were definitively in response to the threats faced by the Revolution in 1793 and 1794. The government was reeling from failing to come up with a solid plan of leadership, and the military was suffering defeats, while the public was increasingly hostile to the Revolution - in some cases in open, armed revolt. This required a radical consolidation of authority and power to centralize the Government's response. The assembly had become virtually ineffective, and as a result the CPS rose to "protect" the ideals of the Revolution. What followed was a incredibly harsh crackdown, but a preservation of the Revolution that did not result in another King Louis. While some values of the Revolution were indelibly sacrificed, the overall ideal of self governance, and nationalism prevailed for a period.
I don't think they abandoned the revolutionary ideals by 1793. They implemented (or created) the constitution of 93 which was probably the most liberal constitution created during the time period (it allowed divorce for women, universal suffrage). Though I do agree with your interpretation of it as consolidating the revolution however, this just seems to be inherited from the previous assembly's effort. France was in a dire situation and the Austrians were situated less then 100 kms from France and so part of these 'tyrannical reforms' were as a result of the circumstances.
Sorry if this not directly answer your question thought it might help !