Rival Claimants to the French Throne 1: Ending 2020

[iloveroyals]

Check out the long front page article in yesterday's Wall Street Journal dedicated to Prince Jean's engagement and his right or wrong claim to the throne. Fascinating !

 

[Warren]

I remember very well the wedding of Carmen and Alfonso - a great show of pomp and all. A union of an older man with a roving eye and a very young woman who just couldn't believe her good luck. It was like the Franco family had hit the royalty jackpot and look where it has all ended.

Yes, even at the time the wedding was interpreted as a warning to Prince Juan Carlos.
Franco was making it clear he had an alternative future King of Spain in his back pocket if need be.

 

[1880 or so]

Responding to Thribette's post #187, the numerous marriages that almost immediately started to take place between French and Spanish dynasts, to which absolutely no one objected, make the intention of the Utrecht renunciations very clear: that no one in future, apart from Felipe V and his heirs, should claim Spain in succession to the Queens of Louis XIII and XIV, and no one should claim France in succession to Felipe V. It was never intended that any descendant of Felipe V should be excluded from France, and any descendant of the other French princes from Spain. Even though certain of the various renunciations could be read that way, what actually happened, without protest, shows the intent. The actual proscriptions on succession were faithfully observed until 1883, when it happened that the person who would have been in succession to France from Felipe V had been excluded from Spain, so decided to ignore the most solemn oath of his ancestor. And so have his successors since.

I happen to believe that the oaths of Kings should be observed. The argument that Felipe V had no power to make such an oath is contentious to say the least, and Vincent among others on this thread has countered it most ably. The situation had never arisen before, that by ordinary laws of descent the Crowns of Spain and France would descend to one head. This was obviously intolerable to the other Powers, and no one suggested it should happen. The obvious solution was that a French prince not in direct line should succeed to Spain, renouncing France, while all other French princes renounced Spain (which no one ever argues about). This is what happened, though it was far from straightforward, the little matter of the War of the Spanish Succession occurring first. It was a precedent, so what? Precedents had been set before, the inheritance of Spain and the Indies was surely a grave enough matter to justify setting another one.

If you hadn't gathered, I am not at all a supporter of Luis Alfonso, and entirely one of the Comte de Paris. It is true that there is little possibility of the Kingdom of France ever being restored. The possibility is reduced still further by monarchists being unable to decide on even whom to support. I wish that all could agree on the true legitimate candidate, the Comte de Paris. But that, I suppose, is even less likely than a restoration of either candidate!

 

[Thribette]

Maria Olivia,
Juan III was the son of "Don Carlos", the brother of Fernando VII, king of Spain, who refused his niece Isabel II could become queen of Spain instead of him. This was not the only reason, in fact, there were acute political and social problems, such a conservative prince as Don Carlos could not accept the new government that was violently at the opposite.
His son Juan III (III for France), who was rather more liberal, did not follow his father's way and took the "incognito title" of "conde de Montizón", after having abdicated (for his carlist "rights" upon the throne of Spain) in favor of his elder son, who was more combative.
Although the Count of Chambord didn't like much Juan III (who had married the princess Count of Chambord loved, and made her unhappy), he had to follow the dynastic laws...

 

[Thribette]

Pamk, you are just proving the efficiency of the Orléans strategy from about 1870.
In France, a prince is not forced to marry a princess, as we say "the cock anoblishes the hen", which is not a very delicate expression... )

1880,

It was never intended that any descendant of Felipe V should be excluded from France, and any descendant of the other French princes from Spain.

Yes, it was, and it was repeated several times in the act of renunciation, and this is really what was written and intended.
Felipe V signed the renunciation sincerely because his grandfather Louis XIV, who knew he was too honest to lie, had made him believe the renunciation was valid. At the same time, Louis XIV asked the duke of Saint-Simon to write a little book stating that only the Chamber of Peers of France could valid such a renunciation, in order to calm Queen Ann who wanted to make it valid by the États-Généraux, which Louis XIV didn't want, of course, it would have given much more strength to the renunciation...
Only three months after the renunciation, Louis XIV's best lawyers published a book proving that Felipe V's renunciation was invalid.
It is not known when Felipe V was entered of the fact his renunciation was invalid, but in 1721, when his nephew Louis XV, still a child, got sick, he sent a letter to the French Parliament, to be opened in case of death of Louis XV, where he announced his coming back from Spain as king of France, as it was his duty.

 

[Camilo2002]

Thribette, I couldn't agree more with you.

The Orleans belong to a cadet branch of the Bourbon Royal House which descends from Louis XIII. The only member of such house who reigned in France for 18 years was Louis Philippe (LP); amongst LP's ancestors we will find many illegitimate descendants of Louis XIV and his mistress Madame de Montespan. LP was a corrupt and ambitious king who caused economic chaos and left the Country soon after the first sign of revolt appeared; he had no guts to defend his throne and flew right away. LP, however, married into legitimate royalty and promoted royal marriages for his children.

In order to understand who would be the righteous claimant/heir to the French throne we have to see succession laws in France and how they were applied in history.

On the death of the last direct Capetian, King Charles IV (1294-1328), the throne went to Philip VI of Valois (1293-1350) who was a grandson of King Philip III (whose father was Louis IX "Saint Louis") of the direct Capetian Dinasty. The throne passed from father to son until the death of Charles VIII on 1498 (Philip VI- John II-Charles V- Charles VI- Charles VII- Louis XI- Charles VIII).

Upon the death of Charles VIII, the throne was claimed by Louis XII as great grandson of Charles V.

Louis XII only had 2 daughters, then the throne passed to Francis I, as great great grandson of Charles V; Francis I was smart enough to marry Louis XII's elder daughter.

Upon the death of Francis I the throne passed to his only son Henry II and then to Henry II's sons Francis II, Charles X and Henry III; the Valois dynasty came to an end with Henry III who was childless.

The first Bourbon who became King of France was Henry IV "the gascon" (born in Pau - Kingdom of Navarre), a ninth generation descendant in direct male line of Louis IX "Saint Louis". After Henry IV, it is very easy to follow who was the right heir to the French Throne as kings were his direct male descendants (Henry IV- Louis XIII- Louis XIV- Louis XV- Louis XVI- Louis XVII- Louis XVIII- Charles X).

Whether we like it or not, if we stick to the Succession Law which started with the first Capet on 987, we will come to the conclusion that the rightful claimant/heir to the throne of France is Louis Alfonso of Bourbon.

Given that the direct male line of Louis XV became extinct with “Henry Count of Chambord” also known as Henry V (grandson of Charles X), we have to observe the direct male line of Louis XIV, no matter the number of generations in between:

Louis XIV- Louis de Bourbon (dauphin du France)- Philip V (King of Spain)- Charles III- Charles IV- Infante Francisco de Paula of Bourbon- Francisco de Asis of Bourbon (Infante and King Consort of Spain)- Alfonso XII- Alfonso XIII- Infante Jaime of Bourbon- HRH Alfonso of Bourbon- HRH Louis Alfonso of Bourbon.

The Orleans have right to claim as descendants of Louis XIII, but under traditional succession law in France direct male descendants of Louis XIV have a better right.

 

[amedea]

If we consider valid the renunciation of king Felipe V for him and his descendants to the french throne and we consider that Orleans lost their rights by voting the death of Louis XVI and by accepting the Constitution of 1830, the correct legimitimist pretender to the french throne are the descendants of Henry de Chambord's sister, Luise, and so .. Bourbon Parma; am I right?
however I've never heard that this branch of the family claims that throne

 

[BELTRANEJA]

I found this story, this is obviously old, but I think this may be useful in resolving the question of succession in France, is the burial of Count of PAris. look!! the guests
THE FIRST:LUIS ALFONSO DE BORBON
..........................

http://i399.photobucket.com/albums/pp77/llerana2/paris005.jpg
http://i399.photobucket.com/albums/pp77/llerana2/paris002-1.jpg
http://i399.photobucket.com/albums/pp77/llerana2/paris003-1.jpg
http://i399.photobucket.com/albums/pp77/llerana2/paris001.jpg
http://i399.photobucket.com/albums/pp77/llerana2/paris.jpg


I like the photo of the two pretenders to the throne of France shaking hands.

But later, the controversy has continued in France​

(I do not know if this story was posted in this forum)​

 

[eshalis]

A descendant of Jean De Bourbon-Soissons is the only legitimate heir to the Throne of France. Someone moved my post to a different forum for some reason. I have a huge container of documents now. This was a family secret kept for hundreds of years due to the fact that we were/are? hunted by some unknown organization.

Sorry but all descendants of Louis XIV are illegitimate.

 

[Warren]

...due to the fact that we were/are? hunted by some unknown organization.

It sounds very Dan Brown.
Your original post was moved here. The French Royalty subforum is for recognised French Royalty and not mysterious claimants with fertile imaginations.

 

[PssMarie-Elisabeth]

French Legitimists

Please Support Louis XX: Louis-Alphonse de Bourbon

Louis Alphonse, Duke of Anjou - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

*List of French monarchs - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia*

 

[Tatiepot1]

The Orleans branch are the rightful heirs to the French Throne. The preent Comte de Paris heads that branch & therefore should be acknowledged as the rightful heir.

 

[PssMarie-Elisabeth]

Are you an Orléanist? .... that royal House is a secondary line of the House of Bourbon

"Bourbon monarchs ruled Navarre (from 1555) and France (from 1589) until the 1792 overthrow of the monarchy during the French Revolution. Restored briefly in 1814 and definitively in 1815 after the fall of the First French Empire, the senior line of the Bourbons was finally overthrown in the July Revolution of 1830. A cadet branch, the House of Orléans, then ruled for 18 years (1830–1848), until it too was overthrown."

 

[Tatiepot1]

Yes, I am.

They are the rightful heirs as decendants from Louis XIII.

 

[Thribette]

Well, in France, kings are not chosen after the tastes of voters, but following preestablished rules, I am sorry that these rules point a prince you don't like...

 

[claudia]

Legitimist are a minory in France.
Luis Alfonso is indeed a spanish commoner with royal origins, he is His Excelence Luis Alfonso de Borbon without any noble title. His father Alfonso de Borbon-Dampierre was also His Excelence according to the will of his grandfather the king of Spain. It was Franco who made them royals. Probably Luis Alfonso will inherit a noble title for the part of his mother but not for the side of his father. They want to obtain from France what they couldn´t from their spanish side.

He is french not for his royal side but because his grandmother Emanuella is french.
If Emmanuela instead of being Dampierre her name be Lubormirstky Luis Alfonso will not be french.
It is absolutely no sense to still be blaming the Orléans for what their ancestors did.
If the Utrecht Treaty is invalid why is Gibraltar part of England?
Can you imagine if we do not recongnized international treatys how do frontiers will change in Europe and in all the world?
For legitimist Luis Alfonso is the right king of Spain and France and Alfonso XIII was king of France, just with that is enough for me to not accept the legitimst pretentions.
Henri Count of Chambord was very close to recover the throne but he refused to recognized a flag, supposing that he did recognized that flag, his heir was the Count of Paris.
Finally is well known that Puig Molto was the biologyc father of king Alfonso XII so was this person the senoir of the Bourbon family?
The real duke of Anjou is H.R H Prince Charles-Philippe´d´Orléans.

 

[PssMarie-Elisabeth]

No offense, but if you're not originally French by origin or if you do NOT live in France please refrain from making presumptions about the percentage of Legitimists and the like .....

I do happen to have friends from France and from what I gather - many French nationalists (not all of course) recognize Louis XX as the rightful heir to the throne.

* FYI *

 

[Thribette]

Claudia, what is, up to you, a commoner?
To me a commoner is someone who is not noble (in the proper sense).
Of course the duke of Anjou is not a commoner.
About Spanish succession, I wonder what you know/don't know exactly, but I suggest you to visit the sites Heraldica and chivalricorders.com, which are in English and very documented, you will understand why the duke of Anjou's grandfather, "Don Jaime" was the legitimate heir of Spain, rejected by his own father because nearly deaf and mute but to Spain it is not a cause of elimination. He and his son authorized Don Juan Carlos, in a 1969 act validated by the Spanish Parliament, the Cortes (none act about succession can be valid in Spain without Cortes ratification), to become the next king of the new monarchy instaured by Franco. Commoners?
Of course, they remained the French royal family, so they remain full royals by this side...

 

[Nico]

No offense, but if you're not originally French by origin or if you do NOT live in France please refrain from making presumptions about the percentage of Legitimists and the like

I'm french and i live in France and i can say that "Louis Alphonse" is totally unknown from the vast majority of the french. They simply don't care about him. For the few knowing a little bit more the "Legitimist case", he's considered as a folkloric, and foreign, figure. The Orleans and even the Bonaparte are far more respected in parisian circles.
The last legitimist heir to the french throne was the Comte of Chambord. Case closed.

 

[claudia]

For legitimists he may be a royal but in facts he is not.Of royal origins but Just a spanish commoner.
The duke of Anjou is His Royal Higness Prince Charles Philippe of Orléans.
On Saturday we will see the wedding of the real heir to the french throne: Prince jean de France Duke of Vendome.

 

[V.F.H.78]

Charles Philippe d'Orléans is NOT the duke of Anjou. The only one duke of Anjou is SAR Luis Alfonso de Bourbon.
Jean d'Orléans is the legitim heir of King Louis-Philippe and the Monarchie de Juillet, nothing more.

 

[Nico]

Jean d'Orléans is the legitim heir of King Louis-Philippe and the Monarchie de Juillet, nothing more.

Sorry to say that but it's a flagrant lack of culture and knowledge of the french history to make such a statement....

 

[V.F.H.78]

The heir to the french throne is necessary the elder of all Capetians. And the elder of the Capetians is Luis Alfonso de Bourbon ; Louis XX. All the true legitimists know that.
The Orléans are the younger branch of the Bourbon royal family.
Jean d'Orléans is the number 79 in the line of succession to the french throne.

 

[Nico]

As you maybe know the last elder FRENCH capetian was the Comte of Chambord. He had no children so the succession rules passed to the younger branch: the Orleans. It's simple, it's history.

For now if you want to change French History (and of course the treaty of Utrecht)and have your very own "exotic" heir it's up to you

Sadly it's a never ending discussion...

 

[Warren]

Yes, the discussion is never-ending because there are two branches of the one dynasty whose supporters fervently believe they have 'right' on their side. Orléanists and Legitimists will never agree because there are two competing lines of descent, one represented by the senior primogeniture Bourbon and the other represented by the senior descendant of the last King of the French. As neither line is likely to die out anytime soon, the argument will continue indefinitely.

On the positive side, it's these sorts of disputes which make dynastic histories and genealogies interesting, and bring them into the present day.

 

[Thribette]

Nico, probably we don't have the same friends, as around me (not among royalists, of course), and in spite of the action of the orleanist and successful magazine Point de Vue, a long time managed by a grand-daughter of an Orléans princess, both princes are known the same way (i.e. little, unfortunately).
Among royalists I would say 50/50 (among the ones who have an opinion), but even when, because of the influence of Charles Maurras, orleanists were 80-90% of the royalists (about WWI to WWII), this had nothing to do with French succession rules, which say without any doubt that the (true) duke of Anjou, Louis de Bourbon, is the legitimate successor to the throne of France.
And about changing French history, well, of course who do it is who try to introduce a new rule in French succession laws, that not only would be new (then, why not) but that would be in contradiction with several previous accessions to the French throne, as well as belongings to dynasts.

 

[Thribette]

Claudia, I understood that you consider Louis XX a commoner, I explained you why he is not, so merely repeating "he is a commoner" lacks argumentation...

 

[V.F.H.78]

It's a pity to see that orleanists always try to change the rules of succession to the throne of France to legitimate the descendants of the Orléans...
It's the same story since the death of the count of Chambord.

 

[claudia]

It is a pity to see how folkloric legitimists are.

If for you Alfonso de Borbón y Dampierre, duke of Cadiz (by the grand father of his wife) was king of France, how can the french king be the Spanish embassador in Sweden?

How can the french king be the embassador of Spain? Very simple, because he was a spanish subject.

 

[FortitudoEjus]

Questions

The heir to the french throne is necessary the elder of all Capetians. And the elder of the Capetians is Luis Alfonso de Bourbon ; Louis XX. All the true legitimists know that.
The Orléans are the younger branch of the Bourbon royal family.
Jean d'Orléans is the number 79 in the line of succession to the french throne.

So far as I know, the senior Capetian line is that of the Barons of Busset... It is an illegitimate branch but they enjoyed the rank of Cousin of the King (so they where recognized as descents of the House of France)... Hence, if you consider invalid the Treaty of Utrecht (that is the pillar of the European modern order, and was registered by both the Cortes and the Parliaments of France), you can even not consider another little formality (the absence of a legitimate marriage): from this perspective Charles de Bourbon, comte de Busset is the rightful King of France!

I have two question for the "legitimists" (but I think that this denomination is misleading, since the Orléans' claim is to be the heirs of Henri V [who recognized the Orléans as legitimate Heirs as per the traditions and laws of the Monarchy], and not of Louis Philippe):
1) Why the Heir of Don Luis Alfonso, HM King Juan Carlos, as all the other Courts of Europe, recognizes the rights of HRH the Count of Paris? Isn't it a contraddiction?
2) If you consider "bastards" the Bussets, why you consider dynasts the descents of a morganatic marriage (that has the same effects of a mariage secret)?
Thank you for your kind answer.