French royal claimant cannot call himself Bourbon, court rules

AFP ^ | Thu, Oct 02, 2003

[presidio9]

Henri d'Orleans, count of Paris and rival pretender to the throne of France, is banned from using the ancient royal name of Bourbon because it was abandoned by his family in the 17th century, France's high court of appeal ruled.

The decision scuppered Orleanist hopes of reclaiming the dynastic title, which will now remain with the senior branch of the royal house -- represented by Louis Alphonse de Bourbon, duke of Anjou and the other contender for the throne.

The Cour de Cassation confirmed a lower court answer to a plea lodged by the 70 year-old count of Paris shortly after he inherited his position in 1999, in which he asked for the right to call himself Henri de Bourbon.

Both courts found that the name had been dropped by Henri's ancestor Philippe d'Orleans, the younger son of King Louis XIII, who was born in 1640. Henri had "no proven legitimate interest in reclaiming possession of the name of Bourbon," the judges said Thursday.

The Orleans and Bourbon families have conducted a bitter and fruitless contest for the right to claim the throne of France ever since the last king -- the Orleanist Louis-Philippe -- lost power in 1848.

While the Orleans line comes through Louis XIII's younger son, the Bourbons pass through the elder -- Louis XIV -- whose descendants ruled till Louis XVI's execution in the revolution. After the restoration Louis XVI's brother Charles X, who reigned from 1824 to 1830, was the last Bourbon king of France.

[Cronos]

I support putting the descendent of Tiglath Pileser I -- the first Assyrian King for Emir of IRaq. During his time (1100 B.C.) he ruled over all of Babylonia, Assyria, Armenia, Syria, parts of the Mede territories (in northwestern Iran) and Canaan into Arabia.

[Cronos]

Who are the Vendeens?

[royalcello]

Similarly would you say that the British Republic (1620 to 1640 or thereabouts) was wrong?

1649 to 1660, and yes, it was wrong. There are few historical figures I despise with the passion I despise Oliver Cromwell. This issue was exhaustively debated on FR before I joined. See this old thread:
Catholics to snub Cromwell festivities

What about the overthrowing of the Tsar?

Yes, I'm against that too. Nicholas II was a good man who loved his country. The abolition of the monarchy paved the way for the evil Soviet tyranny which was arguably the worst government in history.

The Hohenzollern dynasty in Prussia was barely a century old (previously they were just elctors)

Huh? The Kingdom of Prussia was established in 1701, 217 years before the monarchy was overthrown. In any case, I don't see what your point is.

The Scandanavian royalty is a farce as is the Belgian and Dutch.

How are they a "farce"? They provide a patriotic rallying point for their people, have devoted their lives to public service and charity, lend crucial glamor to the Nobel Prize cermonies, and embody their nations' heritage and traditions.

[royalcello]

The Vendeans were the heroic French Catholic royalists who rose up against the Revolution in the 1790s. There's an excellent concise book about their unfortunately overlooked story by Michael Davies, For Altar and Throne, which is available from the traditionalist Catholic publication The Remnant.

[royalcello]

I don't disagree with any of your points. Remember that I have the fleur-de-lis flag on my own wall. If I may somewhat pompously refer to my own essay, I guess I'm still a little torn between neomonarchism and paleomonarchism. You seem to have moved more firmly into the latter camp, am I correct? Probably because I'm still not a Christian, I'm more committed to the narrow goal of preserving or restoring as many monarchies as possible, no matter how many compromises must be made, than to a comprehensive counterrevolution. I may come around to your point of view eventually though...just give me time. :)

[Guelph4ever]

You know I've had to be (or try to be) very diplomatic for a long time, and I am rather enjoying being able to sound as downright reactionary as I please. With a few more films like "The Last Samurai" maybe reactionaries will become more popular.

Especially with France and the fleur-de-lys there is too strong a connection with me between Church & Crown. I will accept changes (as you know) but any compromise on issues dealing with this (whether the Estates Generale or Vatican II) is going to annoy me.

Here's to being hot or cold but never lukewarm!