#legitimist

[eglantine98]

“In the fell clutch of circumstance I have not winced nor cried aloud. Under the bludgeonings of chance My head is bloody, but unbowed.”

[secretly-an-olm]

Jacobite this, Legitimist that, Carlist this, Williamite that

meanwhile I’m just thinking we shouldn’t have a monarchy!

[blackboar]

Richard II's deposition was such drama that folks use it for their own drama seven centuries after.

Lemme translate in English.

Up: 'Usurper, regicide, it reminds us of someone'

Middle: 'I'm not saying that Richard live, but if he lives, he's the true king of England You usurped his crown. If he's dead, you killed him. And if you have caused his death, you've lost all titles and all rights you might have had to the crown'.

Brother Richard Frisby, monk, declaration in front of the court and king Henry IV of England, usurper of Richard II's crown that he killed, 1402.

Cercle d'Action Légitimiste is a legitimist royalist group, who hopes for the end of the french republic and the restoration of the monarchy. But the problem is that not only those groups are marginal in France, they are also deeply divided on the name of the candidate. Basically, there are two branches 'claiming' the throne, which is the branch of Orléans who descend from the brother of Louis XIV, Philip Duke of Orléans. The other branch is the branch of Anjou, who descend from the duke of Anjou and king of Spain Philip V.

The issue here is that the Anjou should, by successoral laws, be the heirs, but they renounced their rights when they became kings of Spain by the treaty of Utrecht (1713) as Britain was fearful that one day they could unite France and Spain into one head. The current Anjou claimant, Louis XXI, is a cousin of the current king of Spain and a grandson of Franco. Meanwhile, the current Orléans heir is the count of Paris Jean IV.

So basically this post is a drama between two marginal factions of the French political spectrum. Royalist infighting started mainly in 1830, when Louis-Philip Ier, an Orléans, took the crown from his Bourbons cousin Charles X in the June Revolution. The constant infighting between royalists from there is one of the main reasons the republic triumphed.

So what does poor Richard have to do with this mess?

Well, one of the arguments of the Anjou-legitimists is that the Orléans are no-good traitors. They draw a parallel between the duke of Lancaster stealing the throne from his legitimate cousin and the duke of Orléans stealing the throne from Charles X. Add also that Louis-Philip Ier's father, Philip Egalité (yh he added 'Egalite' to his name while being one of the richest dude in France) voted Louis XVI's death in 1793. He certainly hoped for the throne but was beheaded some months after during the Terror. So they are basically using a medieval monk saying Henry IV is a usurper to call the Orléans usurpers too. I never thought someone could use a seven hundreds old deposition for his political gains.

[my-ear-trumpet]

by Melville Henry Massue, Marquis de Ruvigny et Raineval, and Cranstoun Metcalfe This article appeared in the September 1897 issue of The Nineteenth Century Review. In France and in Spain the Legitimist is at any rate taken seriously. In England, according to the man in the street, and according to others in other places, the Legitimist is simply an idiot who is not worth further consideration. Yet among English Legitimists are many men of whose sanity there can be no question, whose integrity is beyond dispute, and whose loyalty to Queen Victoria is unimpeachable. What they are doing in this gallery it is the object of this short article to show.