The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #461  
Old 08-24-2016, 04:16 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Kingdom, Heard and McDonald Islands
Posts: 4,679
The monarchists are even today in France. To know the future is a gift only of prophets.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #462  
Old 08-24-2016, 04:26 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,041
Im sure that monarchists in France are a tiny minority. Its not going ot happen... unless there is some kind of coup.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #463  
Old 08-25-2016, 12:42 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Omaha, United States
Posts: 1,853
It would have to truly be a miracle of all coups that the Monarchy would be restored in France. I know it won't be in my lifetime.
Reply With Quote
  #464  
Old 08-25-2016, 02:10 AM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 8,829
Honestly almost nil chance. Restorations are very rare and usually restored from military coup (1st Greece, Spain, Cambodia). And the longer these defunct thrones go without restoration, less likely. In the Orleanist claim, since the 2nd republic we are on the 5th claimant. It has been 145 years, the chances of even a constitutional monarch are basically nil. The Romanians seem to be close, but the deposed king is alive. There is no gap, and even if restored under his child, will be like Spain, still a link. Greece and Bulgaria are the same, deposed still alive and a better chance than France but not likely.
Reply With Quote
  #465  
Old 08-25-2016, 02:18 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 8,157
Restorations are most unlikely. But even non-royal Houses can speak to imagination. See the media-frenzy around the new Duke of Westminster or the late Duchess of Alba. The time that nobles were in the Government, or were mighty warlords are far behind us. The interest remain. Often they still have a fabulous patrimonium. That is also the case with the Orléans family. Be it that the father of the current head was an extremely poor manager and almost lost everything this once dazzling wealthy family owned. What is left, is safely placed into the ownership of foundations. That does not make this family less fascinating.
Reply With Quote
  #466  
Old 01-06-2018, 03:39 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 8,157
The claim of Don Luis Alfonso de Borbón y Martínez-Bordiú on the throne of France is opportunistic bullsh*t, with pardon for the ungentlemanlike word.

Had Luis-Alfonso's grandfather (the Infante Don Jaime) not renounced his rights to the throne of Spain for him and his descendants - the Infante was deaf and dumb - then Luis-Alfonso was King of Spain now.

Then Don Luis-Alfonso, Rey de España, of course had not contested the separation into the two Houses of Bourbon by the Treaty of Utrecht, to which he thanks the very own Spanish throne is his sitting on...

Only because Infante Don Jaime (uncle of King Juan Carlos) renounced his rights, the supporters suddenly conveniently forgot the separation of the two Houses and started to attack the Orléanist claim because their candidate was a direct descendant from Louis XIV while the Orléanist line is from Louis XIV's brother, the Duc d'Orléans.

It is only because of regret about the renunciation of the Infante Don Jaime and influenced by opportunists in the entourage, that suddenly the Spanish Infante, his Spanish son and his Spanish grandson developed aspirations in the direction of France.

Was Don Luis-Alfonso King of Spain now, then he would not have laid a claim on France. Like The Infante Don Juan (Conde de Barcelona), King Don Juan Carlos and King Don Felipe never ever did.
Reply With Quote
  #467  
Old 06-09-2018, 08:10 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Texas, United States
Posts: 3,393
How many royal houses are there in France with a claim to the defunct throne? If you can give me a post number with this info I would appreciate it.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #468  
Old 06-09-2018, 08:19 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 1,586
3 main claimants:
Legitimists/Bourbons with Luis Alfonso de Borbon, the duke of Anjou
Orleanists/Orleans with Henri d'Orleans, the count of Paris
Bonapartes with Jean-Christophe Napoleon, the prince Napoleon

This overview might help.
Reply With Quote
  #469  
Old 06-09-2018, 09:38 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 3,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
How many royal houses are there in France with a claim to the defunct throne? If you can give me a post number with this info I would appreciate it.

Based on agnatic primogeniture and religious tests only, the throne of France should be inherited by the most senior Roman Catholic and male descendant in paternal line of King Louis XIV. The first line among Louis XIV's descendants, which included Kings Louis XV, Louis XVI, Louis XVIII, and Charles X became, however, extinct in male line in 1883 with the demise of the last direct agnatic descendant of Louis XV, Henri de Chambord. All remaining agnatic descendants of Louis XIV were/are then descendants of his grandson, Philippe d'Anjou, later King Philip V of Spain. Those lines include the Spanish Bourbons (who also currently occupy the throne of Spain), followed by the Houses of Bourbon-Two Sicilies and Bourbon-Parma.


Under that order of succession, called Legitimist, the heir to the French throne is Louis Alphonse (Luis Alfonso) de Bourbon, self-styled Duke of Anjou, who is a descendant of King Alfonso XIII of Spain. Although his line is more senior than that of the current King of Spain, D. Felipe VI, he is not King of Spain because his grandfather, Jaime, Duke of Segovia, second son of King Alfonso XIII, renounced his sucession rights (despite later retracting that renunciation), and his father, Alfonso, Duke of Cádiz, agreed to give up his claims in favor of the future King Juan Carlos I, Felipe's father (a rather complicated story, which is not relevant here).

Going back to France, the problem, however, with the Legitimist line is that, when Philippe d'Anjou became the first Bourbon King of Spain , there was a war, called the War of Spanish Succession, mostly between France/Spain on one side and Great Britain, the Holy Roman Empire (under Habsburg rule) and the Dutch Republic on the other side. That war was settled by a treaty called the Treaty of Utrecht, under which Philip V of Spain renounced all succession rights to the throne of France in his name and in the name of all his future descendants. The treaty was ratified, among others, by the Kings of France and Great Britain. If we assume the Treaty of Utrecht to be valid, then all currently living descendants of Louis XIV are legally excluded from the succession, which must then pass to the next collateral line, which would be the most senior remaining line of agnatic descendants of King Louis XIII who don't descend simultaneously from King Louis XIV. That would be the House of Orléans, who descends from the younger brother of Louis XIV (also an ancestor of the current Jacobite pretenders to the thrones of England and Scotland BTW).


Under that second line of succession, called Orléanist, the heir to throne would be the head of the House of Orléans, Henri, Count of Paris, who, in the "legitimist" line, would be otherwise only 80th in line. It must be noted, however, that, even if one doesn't accept the validity of the Treaty of Utrecht, there is an argument that, by accepting and retaining the throne of Spain and leaving France for 300 years , Philip V and his descendants incurred in a "flaw of foreignness" (vice de pérégrinité), which forefeited their dynastic claims to the French throne under the customary law of the Kingdom of France. Most sensible monarchists would agree then that the Orléans are the legitimate legal heirs to the French throne.



Finally, there is a third spurious group of pretenders to the French throne, called "Bonapartists", who claim to be the heirs to the dictator Napoleon Bonaparte, even though Napoleon doesn't actually have any direct living descendants today, and the current Bonapartist pretender, Jean-Christophe, Prince Napoléon, actually descends from a younger brother of Napoleon, Jérôme Bonaparte. The Bonapartists don't actually claim the title of "King of France and Navarre" as the Legitimists, or "King of the French" as the Orléanists (a title briefly assumed by Louis Philippe of Orléans, later King Louis Philippe I, when he usurped the throne from the descendants of Louis XV under the French Revolution of 1830, being later deposed in 1848). Instead, they claim the title of "Emperor of the French", the designation of the head of the regime established by Napoleon Bonaparte after seizing control of the troubled French Republic in a coup d'État.



Since the entity known as the "French Empire" has no legitimacy under the laws of the Kingdom of France and the descendants of the Bonaparte family have no succession rights in that Kingdom, the Bonapartist line should be simply ignored by any bona fide monarchist.
Reply With Quote
  #470  
Old 06-11-2018, 11:53 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Texas, United States
Posts: 3,393
Thank you mbruno and Somebody for the info. I've always found French royal history confusing and you helped a lot. I seem to recall that some in this thread were against d'Orléans branch because of the traitor Duke... Shouldn't the descendants get a pass because the traitor Duke got a visit from Queen Karma?
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #471  
Old 06-12-2018, 01:24 AM
JR76's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 1,698
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
Since the entity known as the "French Empire" has no legitimacy under the laws of the Kingdom of France and the descendants of the Bonaparte family have no succession rights in that Kingdom, the Bonapartist line should be simply ignored by any bona fide monarchist.
There is no Kingdom of France. Technically it finally fell in 1830, was succeeded by the Kingdom of the French and by later republics and the Second Empire making it's laws regarding any legitimacy of the Bonaparte Empire obsolete by now. The Napoleons doesn't claim the throne of the Kingdom of France and does not to my knowledge make any pretence on reintroducing an Imperial system and are instead more devoted to maintain the Bonaparte legacy. As you stated somewhere in your post there's no living descendants of either of the two Napoleons although both left illegitimate descendants if I remember correctly. Quite ironically the current Prince Napoleon has multiple lines of descent from the Bourbons of France but none from the two emperors who's legacy he continues.
Reply With Quote
  #472  
Old 06-12-2018, 06:51 AM
maria-olivia's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Posts: 4,815
President de Gaulle gave some hope to the Count of Paris. The Count of Paris organised at Dreux a glittering Wedding of his eldest Son Henri , le Dauphin, with Duchess Marie-Thérèse of Wurtenberg.
And general de Gaulle change his mind definitely.
Reply With Quote
  #473  
Old 06-12-2018, 11:31 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 3,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR76 View Post
There is no Kingdom of France. Technically it finally fell in 1830, was succeeded by the Kingdom of the French and by later republics and the Second Empire making it's laws regarding any legitimacy of the Bonaparte Empire obsolete by now. The Napoleons doesn't claim the throne of the Kingdom of France and does not to my knowledge make any pretence on reintroducing an Imperial system and are instead more devoted to maintain the Bonaparte legacy. As you stated somewhere in your post there's no living descendants of either of the two Napoleons although both left illegitimate descendants if I remember correctly. Quite ironically the current Prince Napoleon has multiple lines of descent from the Bourbons of France but none from the two emperors who's legacy he continues.

What I am saying is that , if the monarchy were to be restored, then it would be logical to choose as King someone who had some plausible claim to the throne based on historic continuity with the previous regime. The Spanish constitution for example calls Juan Carlos the “heir to the historic dynasty”, which, considering the renunciations of his (now deceased) father and his uncle, is actually true.

The “ Prince Napoléon” is not, I think, a member of the historic dynasty or in the legitimist line of succession. There is no point then in considering him a plausible candidate to assume the throne if the monarchy were restored. People who support the Napoleonic claim are not monarchists. They are Bonapartists, who do not advocate the restoration of the Kingdom of France as monarchists do, but rather the restoration of the French Empire, which is a different regime that actually arose from the French Republic rather than from historic continuity with the French monarchy.

Should the Kingdom of France be restored, of course it would have to be so under a modern constitution, patterned for example after the present Spanish constitution. But installing any king other than the legitimate heir to the historic dynasty would be completely pointless.
Reply With Quote
  #474  
Old 06-12-2018, 11:35 AM
Furienna's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Örnsköldsvik, Sweden
Posts: 1,378
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
What I am saying is that , if the monarchy were to be restored, then it would be logical to choose as King someone who had some plausible claim to the throne based on historic continuity with the previous regime. The Spanish constitution for example calls Juan Carlos the “heir to the historic dynasty”, which, considering the renunciations of his (now deceased) father, and his uncle is actually true.

The “ Prince Napoléon” is not, I think, a member of the historic dynasty or in the legitimist line of succession. There is no point then in considering him a plausible candidate to assume the throne if the monarchy were restored. People who support the Napoleônica claim are not monarchists. They are bonapartists, who do not advocate the restoration of the Kingdom of France as monarchists do, but rather the restoration of the French Empire, which is a different regime that actually arise from the French Republic rather than from historic continuity with the French monarchy.

Should the Kingdom of France be restored, of course it would have to be so under a modern constitution, patterned for example after the present Spanish constitution. But installing any king other than the legitimate heir to the historic dynasty would be completely pointless.
Well, we do have the possibility that the French public would want a Bonapartist empire rather than a kingdom. But I would guess that most of them are content with having a republic anyway.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Monarchy and Restoration; Rival Families and Claimants aj00192557 The Imperial Family of Russia 977 06-10-2018 10:46 AM
Stuart Succession and Jacobite Pretenders hillary_nugent British Royal History 148 03-30-2018 05:28 PM
Queen Victoria (1819-1901) TOMMIX British Royal History 510 03-15-2018 04:26 PM




Popular Tags
aif camilla caracciolo chris o'neill crown princess victoria current events duchess of brabant family fashion felipe and letizia general news hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume hereditary prince alois infanta cristina infanta leonor infanta sofia iñaki urdangarín king carl gustaf king felipe king felipe and queen letizia current events king felipe vi king philippe king willem-alexander letizia liechtenstein lord snowdon meghan markle news norwegian royal family porphyria prince carl philip prince charles prince daniel prince gabriel prince harry prince harry of wales prince jean prince nicholas prince oscar prince sebastian princess estelle princess leonore princess madeleine princess of asturias princess victoria queen letizia queen letizia eveningwear queen margerthe queen mary of teck queen mathilde queen maxima queen maxima fashion queen maxima style romanov royal royal ancestry royal geneology royal wedding soldier spanish royal family events state visit stephanie sweden swedish royal family victoria waldeck wedding windsor wedding working visit



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:16 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018
Jelsoft Enterprises