Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-22-2014, 02:44 PM
 
31,904 posts, read 26,961,756 times
Reputation: 24814

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgato View Post
I was just wondering about the Pretender To The Throne - is that what they call the current royal descendant who was supposed to be king if France was still a monarchy? Are they allowed to reside in, or even to enter France? Or are they banished from the country forever. I remember a few years ago there was a Pretender To The Throne who was in a freak accident and died, and then his son took over, well assumed, the "title" of Pretender. I may have it wrong. I wonder if they are still wealthy or at least have some titles attached to their birthright.
Heirs of the Capet dynasty haven't used "Pretender to the Throne..." in about one or two decades now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-22-2014, 02:56 PM
 
31,904 posts, read 26,961,756 times
Reputation: 24814
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgato View Post
Thank you for the list! It's difficult to find people that know anything about French history, and on this thread the posters know so much, it's a great resource to come to.
That is not true, just use "Google" or any decent search engine and you'll find volumes about the history of France including the ancien regime monarchs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2014, 03:08 PM
 
31,904 posts, read 26,961,756 times
Reputation: 24814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Futurist110 View Post
Out of curiosity--isn't the Orleanists' claim to the French throne more accepted than the Legitimists' claim to the French throne? After all, there is a little thing called the Treaty of Utrecht, and in addition, the Orleanists appear to have a greater family and historical connection to France than the Legitimists do (after all, the Legitimist claimants to the French throne lived in Spain for the vast majority of the last 300 years, whereas this is not true of the Orleanists).

See: Louis Philippe I - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And no, just because an heir or branch of a royal house resides outside of a county does not disqualify them from inheriting a throne. It is how the Bourbons of Spain got that throne (after a long, bloody and expensive war), in the first place.

Regarding the battles over various *pretenders* to the throne of France, at least for the Bourbons much of the battle stems from one act, Louis Philippe II, Duke of Orleans active involvement in events leading up to and then promoting the French Revolution and then voting in favour of the execution of his cousin, Louis XIV. Though eventually meeting the same fate as his cousin, since then Orléanist or anything to do with those who voted in favour of the murder of Louis XVI has been a dirty word to a certain segment of French society.
Louis Philippe II, Duke of Orléans - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Louis Philippie II was also responsible for drumming up and supporting much of the early and continued hate against Queen Marie-Antoinette almost from the moment she arrived upon French soil. Long story short he wanted his cousin and the king's wife off the throne replaced by himself at the head of a new constitutional monarchy.
Orléanist - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2014, 12:57 AM
 
8,495 posts, read 4,160,449 times
Reputation: 7043
Default French History

Quote:
Originally Posted by BugsyPal View Post
That is not true, just use "Google" or any decent search engine and you'll find volumes about the history of France including the ancien regime monarchs.
I've been doing research and it's been fascinating seeing all the information that is out there. I didn't know they stopped using the term "pretender to the throne." Thanks!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2014, 08:19 AM
 
Location: Peterborough, England
472 posts, read 925,115 times
Reputation: 416
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgato View Post
I've been doing research and it's been fascinating seeing all the information that is out there. I didn't know they stopped using the term "pretender to the throne." Thanks!

I didn't think royal pretenders usually called themselves pretenders.

That is a word normally used by their opponents. The pretender himself usually just calls himself King, or maybe "de jure king" or similar.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2014, 01:25 PM
 
54 posts, read 58,768 times
Reputation: 11
So, any conclusions? Was the last king dismissed by the revolution, or did the allies put another person from that royal-family on the throne again after Napoleon lost the war? Thanks
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2014, 03:19 PM
 
31,904 posts, read 26,961,756 times
Reputation: 24814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikestone8 View Post
I didn't think royal pretenders usually called themselves pretenders.

That is a word normally used by their opponents. The pretender himself usually just calls himself King, or maybe "de jure king" or similar.
Sorry but the counts of Paris used "pretender to the throne of France" just as the Stuarts did for England until they finally died out.


Persons cannot call themselves "king" or "queen" where a monarchy has not existed for >200 years. It also becomes difficult when there isn't a direct and undisputed claimant as with the Bourbons. However the throne or crown if you believe the old ways are forever, who sits upon or whose head is placed however is another matter.

When Louis XVI was judicially murdered it created a demise in the crown and his son became Louis XVII, that is all pretty clear. However after the young king's murder by neglect there was again a demise in the crown and the throne passed according to House rules.

Last edited by BugsyPal; 03-23-2014 at 03:42 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2014, 05:07 PM
 
Location: SoCal
5,899 posts, read 5,793,423 times
Reputation: 1930
Quote:
Originally Posted by BugsyPal View Post
See: Louis Philippe I - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1. And no, just because an heir or branch of a royal house resides outside of a county does not disqualify them from inheriting a throne. It is how the Bourbons of Spain got that throne (after a long, bloody and expensive war), in the first place.

2. Regarding the battles over various *pretenders* to the throne of France, at least for the Bourbons much of the battle stems from one act, Louis Philippe II, Duke of Orleans active involvement in events leading up to and then promoting the French Revolution and then voting in favour of the execution of his cousin, Louis XIV. Though eventually meeting the same fate as his cousin, since then Orléanist or anything to do with those who voted in favour of the murder of Louis XVI has been a dirty word to a certain segment of French society.
Louis Philippe II, Duke of Orléans - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Louis Philippe II was also responsible for drumming up and supporting much of the early and continued hate against Queen Marie-Antoinette almost from the moment she arrived upon French soil. Long story short he wanted his cousin and the king's wife off the throne replaced by himself at the head of a new constitutional monarchy.
Orléanist - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
1. No, but it might make their claim less valid than the claim of another royal house/branch which has a closer recent connection to this country.

Also, the Treaty of Utrecht might disqualify the Spanish Bourbons from becoming the monarchs of France in a restored French monarchy.

2. The thing is that I don't see why one's descendants should be disqualified from the line of succession simply due to what this individual himself did.

By that rationale, wouldn't the claims of Cyril Vladimirovich (1876-1938) and of his son, Vladimir Cyrillovich (1917-1992), to the former Russian throne be considered invalid/less valid as well? (I think that Cyril supported the Russian Revolution in 1917, which resulted in the overthrow of the Russian monarchy.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2014, 05:09 PM
 
Location: SoCal
5,899 posts, read 5,793,423 times
Reputation: 1930
Quote:
Originally Posted by Petrolava View Post
So, any conclusions? Was the last king dismissed by the revolution, or did the allies put another person from that royal-family on the throne again after Napoleon lost the war? Thanks
No, after Napoleon III got overthrown in 1870, France established a republican system of government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2014, 05:43 PM
 
31,904 posts, read 26,961,756 times
Reputation: 24814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Futurist110 View Post
No, after Napoleon III got overthrown in 1870, France established a republican system of government.
To reinforce that fact no small amount of property belonging to the Imperial or Royal throne was sold off by the French government. This included one of the most spectacular jewel sales of all time as much of the Crown Jewels of France were sold at auction. Something many came to regret later and thus efforts have been launched to reclaim. The French government IIRC sent bidders to the estate auction sale of Elizabeth Taylor's jewels to fetch back an item that once was part of the CJ collection.

The rationale behind the sales was to eliminate anything for royalists and or those supporting a restoration of a monarchy to rally round.

Quite honestly with the judicial murder of Louis XVI the seeds of a secular and equal French society were sown. Once you go down that path it is hard to reconcile that ideal with a monarchy and all that goes with it including nobility. French society today is by no means equal, and in some ways still runs pretty much along the lines of ancien régime, but no one is going to install a monarchy any time soon.

One supposes if the Bourbons had been less unyielding and learned from the past rather than attempting to impose it upon France, some sort of constitutional monarchy *might* have worked.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top