Discussion:
1651: The Fronde leads to anarchy
(too old to reply)
Jörg
2006-10-16 00:10:44 UTC
Permalink
Just a thought:
WI the Second Fronde after 1650 had due to some butterflies led to the
very premeture death of the young king Louis XIV and his brother
Philippe, at the age of 13 and 11? Not by assassination or execution -
an accident during a hasty retreat or a ill-treated maladie would do as
well.

What now? Gaston will be king, but probably very weak, and men like
Condé, Conti, Turenne, the Duc de Bouillon, even the Cardinal de Retz,
will compete for power - and that will also mean the marriage with
Anne, the Duchess of Montpensier. (BTW; if Salic Law is maintained, who
will be the heir of Gaston? The Bourbon line seems to end with his
death?)

I have the feeling that what ever happens in detauil, the strength of
France will be much worse off. There might be weak king with overly
powerful nobles, there might even be a real civil war between those
nobles.

Even more genralizing, this means that France is so weakened that the
whole European system is changed. I cannot see Spain regaining real
importance. Perhaps they manage to keep more Burgundian/*Belgian
territory, but their glory days are over.

The English-Scottish Restoration might be changed completely by
removing Charles II., but in any case I can hardly imagine
England-Scotland becoming as influential on the continent 1650-1700 as
France was OTL.

The Dutch Golden Age is not yet over, but they are much too weak
militarily. Brandenburg is still in its infancy.

So what happens? Which power or which alliance might fill the vacuum
left by an implosion of France?

Jörg
L***@gmail.com
2006-10-16 01:29:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jörg
WI the Second Fronde after 1650 had due to some butterflies led to the
very premeture death of the young king Louis XIV and his brother
Philippe, at the age of 13 and 11? Not by assassination or execution -
an accident during a hasty retreat or a ill-treated malady would do as
well.
Didn't we have something like this a while ago, where Phil and Lou go
down a flight of stairs or something?
Post by Jörg
What now? Gaston will be king, but probably very weak, and men like
Condé, Conti, Turenne, the Duc de Bouillon, even the Cardinal de Retz,
will compete for power - and that will also mean the marriage with
Anne, the Duchess of Montpensier.
Oh! Fun! Can she play the part of Margaret of Anjou in this particular
brand of the War of the Roses? Louis hated her living guts, but she
seems to have the begininngs of a reasonably talented person, unlike
her husband.

She could even rule in his name and place a bastard son on the
throne...
Post by Jörg
(BTW; if Salic Law is maintained, who
will be the heir of Gaston? The Bourbon line seems to end with his
death?)
Let's take a quick trip to the Almanch de Gotha.

Henri IV had children by Catherine Henriette de Balzac d'Entragues,
Marquise de Verneuil:

Gaston Henri, Duc de Verneuil, who was legitimized in 1603, two years
after his birth. He died in 1682, and about him, I know nothing.

Henri's other semi-legitimate children were girls or didn't live to
majority.
Post by Jörg
I have the feeling that what ever happens in detail, the strength of
France will be much worse off. There might be weak king with overly
powerful nobles, there might even be a real civil war between those
nobles.
Maybe, maybe not. Queen Anne might be able to rule, as I mentioned
above, or France could wobble on. On the bright side, no Louis XIV
monstrosity and no Versailles.
Post by Jörg
Even more genralizing, this means that France is so weakened that the
whole European system is changed. I cannot see Spain regaining real
importance. Perhaps they manage to keep more Burgundian/*Belgian
territory, but their glory days are over.
Oh, I think William of Orange would make off with that, or at least,
some of it.
Post by Jörg
The English-Scottish Restoration might be changed completely by
removing Charles II but in any case I can hardly imagine
England-Scotland becoming as influential on the continent 1650-1700 as
France was OTL.
Agree in the latter, but not the former. I'd expect Charles II and
Mommy would be quite the important prize for whomever could get a hold
on them. They're sort of a boobie prize, but the Lord Protector in
England is no prize pig, and neither is his son. Where they'd end up,
if they fly from France...Sweden? Denmark? the Dutch Republic?

I think the Princess of Orange might be able to do something for her
brother, if not her Papist mother, alliances to the English republic
aside. Monck is still around, and one thing should lead to another,
more or less.
Post by Jörg
The Dutch Golden Age is not yet over, but they are much too weak
militarily.
Quite; but they're still stronger than Spain in this era, mas o menos.
Which means a larger Dutch Republic, including OTL's Belgium...

William III spends his young life in the field against a weak and
divided France, only to be made King of England. Hmm. Due to
butterflies, the Protestand Union becomes the 800 pound gorilla in
Western Europe.

This can't be good
Post by Jörg
Brandenburg is still in its infancy.
Verily, but rising fast. I can't see what would stop it from continuing
to grow through this era. Though without Louis XIV, we don't get the
War of Spanish Succession, but Queen Anne might find her own way to
knit France together, as Regent for her adorable sons and her
weak-willed husband, who's mind is "too delicate for this world"
Post by Jörg
So what happens? Which power or which alliance might fill the vacuum
left by an implosion of France?
Depends on whether or not France implodes, and that much depends on
Anne; the Wiki article makes her sound at least more competent than her
would be husband. Whatever becomes the Queen's party might be able to
hold France together, and crush the various other factions in turn.

If that happens, France will grow slower, and still become the
superpower of OTL's, though it'll skip the wars of Devolution and
suchlike, I guess.

Cheers

L
Jörg
2006-10-16 12:35:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
WI the Second Fronde after 1650 had due to some butterflies led to the
very premeture death of the young king Louis XIV and his brother
Philippe, at the age of 13 and 11? Not by assassination or execution -
an accident during a hasty retreat or a ill-treated malady would do as
well.
Didn't we have something like this a while ago, where Phil and Lou go
down a flight of stairs or something?
Can't say, honestly. But I think the close temporal (and cuasal)
relation with the 2nd Fronde is rather important.
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
What now? Gaston will be king, but probably very weak, and men like
Condé, Conti, Turenne, the Duc de Bouillon, even the Cardinal de Retz,
will compete for power - and that will also mean the marriage with
Anne, the Duchess of Montpensier.
Oh! Fun! Can she play the part of Margaret of Anjou in this particular
brand of the War of the Roses? Louis hated her living guts, but she
seems to have the begininngs of a reasonably talented person, unlike
her husband.
Well, her first request for royal permission to marry her OTL husband
came in 1670, apprently. So I think we are safe to assume that this
relationship will be butterflied away. Wikipedia says that she even
thought of marrying the Prince of Wales (Charles II). Between 1652 and
1662, that might be at least possible. But probably too much fun, even
if Salic Law bars Charles (if he is *restored) from claiming the throne
of France more directly than he did anyway by being King of England.

Hm, strange butterfly: The Brits don't gain Bombay as dowry from
Portugal.
Post by L***@gmail.com
She could even rule in his name and place a bastard son on the
throne...
See above. A strong Reine Anne would be very inetresting, but I guess
many very powerful nobles and princes of the royal blood would try to
marry her - by a French version of rough wooing, if necessary.
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
(BTW; if Salic Law is maintained, who
will be the heir of Gaston? The Bourbon line seems to end with his
death?)
Let's take a quick trip to the Almanch de Gotha.
Henri IV had children by Catherine Henriette de Balzac d'Entragues,
Gaston Henri, Duc de Verneuil, who was legitimized in 1603, two years
after his birth. He died in 1682, and about him, I know nothing.
Henri's other semi-legitimate children were girls or didn't live to
majority.
I am afraid that even the legitimized childern won't count much unless
they head a real superior army. Probably some Bourbon branch beyond
Henri's lines will claim the top spot. Ah, says Wikipedia:
"Upon the accession to France's throne of Henry IV de Bourbon in 1589,
his first cousin-once-removed Henry, Prince of Condé (1588-1646),
was heir presumptive to the crown until 1601. [...] from 1589 to 1709
the Princes of Condé coincidentally held the rank at court of Premier
Prince du Sang Royal (First Prince of the Blood Royal), [...]"

So we can probably assume that Louis II Duc de Bourbon, "the Great
Condé" (as the then ruling eldest son of the Prince Henry mentioned
above) will claim to be the king once Gaston dies sonless. I can't say
whether his OTL death in 1660 will happen another tim in this TL.
Probably.

One nice prerequisite for trouble: Condé cannot marry Anne to solidify
his claim, since he is married since he is married since 1641, to a
niece of Richelieu. She has born him a son in 1443, who is 16 years
younger than Anne, so marrying them to each other seems out, as well.
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
I have the feeling that what ever happens in detail, the strength of
France will be much worse off. There might be weak king with overly
powerful nobles, there might even be a real civil war between those
nobles.
Maybe, maybe not. Queen Anne might be able to rule, as I mentioned
above, or France could wobble on. On the bright side, no Louis XIV
monstrosity and no Versailles.
Post by Jörg
Even more genralizing, this means that France is so weakened that the
whole European system is changed. I cannot see Spain regaining real
importance. Perhaps they manage to keep more Burgundian/*Belgian
territory, but their glory days are over.
Oh, I think William of Orange would make off with that, or at least,
some of it.
Sounds likely, *if* he ever comes to power (he will exist, being born
in November 1650). With Louis XIV dead, there will not even be vaguely
the events that led France to attack the Dutch in 1672. So De Witt
might stay in power until his resigantion or natural death, whereas
Willem van Oranje, het kind van state, may lead a quiet private life
with a lover of his choice. (Mary "II" won't be born in this TL, and
the Orange-Stuart marriage is highly contingent of the Anglo-Dutch
relations.)

So I would say the chances of WIII ever becoming Stadtholder in a TL
with a seriously less offensively capable France are much worse than in
OTL. I cannot claim that their would *never* be a successful ousting of
the Statists by the Orangists (perhaps when De Witt dies/steps down),
but that would really would be a secondary PoD.
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
The English-Scottish Restoration might be changed completely by
removing Charles II but in any case I can hardly imagine
England-Scotland becoming as influential on the continent 1650-1700 as
France was OTL.
Agree in the latter, but not the former. I'd expect Charles II and
Mommy would be quite the important prize for whomever could get a hold
on them. They're sort of a boobie prize, but the Lord Protector in
England is no prize pig, and neither is his son. Where they'd end up,
if they fly from France...Sweden? Denmark? the Dutch Republic?
Spaqin? Portugal? Perhaps even Italy? OTOH, the fate of Chrales II is
highly chance-driven. Hm, Worcester is in 1651. After his flight from
England, CII might not even return to France if there is serious
trouble brewing. He might go (almost) directly to The Hague (or to
Breda)and take his mother with him. Or not. Henrietta and James staying
in France, the latter fighting in the wars among the nobles has a
certain charme, too.
Post by L***@gmail.com
I think the Princess of Orange might be able to do something for her
brother, if not her Papist mother, alliances to the English republic
aside. Monck is still around, and one thing should lead to another,
more or less.
The Princess was rather unpopular in the Netherlands, AFAIK.
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
The Dutch Golden Age is not yet over, but they are much too weak
militarily.
Quite; but they're still stronger than Spain in this era, mas o menos.
Which means a larger Dutch Republic, including OTL's Belgium...
Not under De Witt, I think. Catholic peasants and rivalling Flemish
merchants - what are they good for? But the Dutch might take additional
Spanish colonial possessions and keep others like New Amsterdam.
Post by L***@gmail.com
William III spends his young life in the field against a weak and
divided France, only to be made King of England. Hmm. Due to
butterflies, the Protestand Union becomes the 800 pound gorilla in
Western Europe.
This can't be good
It is also highly unlikely, I think.
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Brandenburg is still in its infancy.
Verily, but rising fast. I can't see what would stop it from continuing
to grow through this era. Though without Louis XIV, we don't get the
War of Spanish Succession, but Queen Anne might find her own way to
knit France together, as Regent for her adorable sons and her
weak-willed husband, who's mind is "too delicate for this world"
Might happen. It would be interesting just to see who the husband might
be ...
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
So what happens? Which power or which alliance might fill the vacuum
left by an implosion of France?
Depends on whether or not France implodes, and that much depends on
Anne; the Wiki article makes her sound at least more competent than her
would be husband. Whatever becomes the Queen's party might be able to
hold France together, and crush the various other factions in turn.
Time is an important factor, I think. Anne is just 24 in 1651, and for
some years her father Gaston weill hold the title of king. If he is as
ineffectual as OTL, she might not inherit much to work with, or be sold
by her father to the highest bidder. Plus, Condé will definitely deny
that she has any right to inherit the title at all.

I very much suspect that Gaston will make concessions to the mighty
nobles (and other parties) that will undo most of the works of
Richelieu and Mazarin.

Thanks for replying,

Jörg
a***@hotmail.com
2006-10-16 13:39:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
What now? Gaston will be king, but probably very weak, and men like
Condé, Conti, Turenne, the Duc de Bouillon, even the Cardinal de Retz,
will compete for power - and that will also mean the marriage with
Anne, the Duchess of Montpensier.
Oh! Fun! Can she play the part of Margaret of Anjou in this particular
brand of the War of the Roses? Louis hated her living guts, but she
seems to have the begininngs of a reasonably talented person, unlike
her husband.
Well, her first request for royal permission to marry her OTL husband
came in 1670, apprently.
So I think we are safe to assume that this
relationship will be butterflied away. Wikipedia says that she even
thought of marrying the Prince of Wales (Charles II). Between 1652 and
1662, that might be at least possible.
And, IIRC, at some point there was a possibility of marriage to the
King of Poland. Not to mention various lesser dignitaries...
Post by Jörg
But probably too much fun, even
if Salic Law bars Charles (if he is *restored) from claiming the throne
of France more directly than he did anyway by being King of England.
AFAIK, her main attraction was not a way to the throne but her immense
personal wealth.

[]
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
(BTW; if Salic Law is maintained, who
will be the heir of Gaston? The Bourbon line seems to end with his
death?)
Let's take a quick trip to the Almanch de Gotha.
Henri IV had children by Catherine Henriette de Balzac d'Entragues,
Gaston Henri, Duc de Verneuil, who was legitimized in 1603, two years
after his birth. He died in 1682, and about him, I know nothing.
Henri's other semi-legitimate children were girls or didn't live to
majority.
Henry's grandson, Duke de Beaufort, was one of the leaders of the
Fronde. Of course, there was a long way from being "King of the
Markets" to becoming the King of France. :-)
Post by Jörg
I am afraid that even the legitimized childern won't count much unless
they head a real superior army. Probably some Bourbon branch beyond
"Upon the accession to France's throne of Henry IV de Bourbon in 1589,
his first cousin-once-removed Henry, Prince of Condé (1588-1646),
was heir presumptive to the crown until 1601. [...] from 1589 to 1709
the Princes of Condé coincidentally held the rank at court of Premier
Prince du Sang Royal (First Prince of the Blood Royal), [...]"
So we can probably assume that Louis II Duc de Bourbon, "the Great
Condé" (as the then ruling eldest son of the Prince Henry mentioned
above) will claim to be the king once Gaston dies sonless. I can't say
whether his OTL death in 1660 will happen another tim in this TL.
Probably.
As I understand, the main problem with the Great Conde was his
personality. At some point he became a leader of a powerful party but,
thanks to his charming personality he managed to alienate almost
everybody from the parisians to Turenne (who initially supported him
but changed sides after it became clear that Conde is going to pursue
only his own interests).
Soon enough he found himself without any allies and had to join the
Spaniards.

Unless the peace of the Pyrenees in your TL happens at the same time
(1659) as in OTL and includes, as in OTL, a pardon for Conde, situation
with succession becomes very ...er... interesting.

What if Conde gets from the Spaniards Luxemburg (IIRC, this was an
option in the case Louis refuse to pardon him) and makes his claim to
the throne of France from this position?
Jörg
2006-10-16 22:47:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
What now? Gaston will be king, but probably very weak, and men like
Condé, Conti, Turenne, the Duc de Bouillon, even the Cardinal de Retz,
will compete for power - and that will also mean the marriage with
Anne, the Duchess of Montpensier.
Oh! Fun! Can she play the part of Margaret of Anjou in this particular
brand of the War of the Roses? Louis hated her living guts, but she
seems to have the begininngs of a reasonably talented person, unlike
her husband.
Well, her first request for royal permission to marry her OTL husband
came in 1670, apprently.
So I think we are safe to assume that this
relationship will be butterflied away. Wikipedia says that she even
thought of marrying the Prince of Wales (Charles II). Between 1652 and
1662, that might be at least possible.
And, IIRC, at some point there was a possibility of marriage to the
King of Poland. Not to mention various lesser dignitaries...
Do you happen to remember which king was meant?
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
But probably too much fun, even
if Salic Law bars Charles (if he is *restored) from claiming the throne
of France more directly than he did anyway by being King of England.
AFAIK, her main attraction was not a way to the throne but her immense
personal wealth.
In OTL, yes. After all, especially after 1661, her father was dead, the
king, his son and his brother alive. So her chances ever to claim the
throne are very slim. In this TL, the conditions are very different,
and whoever marries her may use her fortunes to pay for the way to the
throne.
Post by a***@hotmail.com
[]
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
(BTW; if Salic Law is maintained, who
will be the heir of Gaston? The Bourbon line seems to end with his
death?)
Let's take a quick trip to the Almanch de Gotha.
Henri IV had children by Catherine Henriette de Balzac d'Entragues,
Gaston Henri, Duc de Verneuil, who was legitimized in 1603, two years
after his birth. He died in 1682, and about him, I know nothing.
Henri's other semi-legitimate children were girls or didn't live to
majority.
Henry's grandson, Duke de Beaufort, was one of the leaders of the
Fronde. Of course, there was a long way from being "King of the
Markets" to becoming the King of France. :-)
Post by Jörg
I am afraid that even the legitimized childern won't count much unless
they head a real superior army. Probably some Bourbon branch beyond
"Upon the accession to France's throne of Henry IV de Bourbon in 1589,
his first cousin-once-removed Henry, Prince of Condé (1588-1646),
was heir presumptive to the crown until 1601. [...] from 1589 to 1709
the Princes of Condé coincidentally held the rank at court of Premier
Prince du Sang Royal (First Prince of the Blood Royal), [...]"
So we can probably assume that Louis II Duc de Bourbon, "the Great
Condé" (as the then ruling eldest son of the Prince Henry mentioned
above) will claim to be the king once Gaston dies sonless. I can't say
whether his OTL death in 1660 will happen another tim in this TL.
Probably.
As I understand, the main problem with the Great Conde was his
personality. At some point he became a leader of a powerful party but,
thanks to his charming personality he managed to alienate almost
everybody from the parisians to Turenne (who initially supported him
but changed sides after it became clear that Conde is going to pursue
only his own interests).
Soon enough he found himself without any allies and had to join the
Spaniards.
OTL that happened in September 52. I agree, something similar seems
plausible during the Second Fronde of TTL as well. But that does not
mean that he doesn´t have a good claim once Gaston dies. If he is
still friendely with the Spaniards, they might decide to back him in a
last gamble to gain the upper hand over France by installing a puppet
king in Paris. Not that that will work as planned, probably.
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Unless the peace of the Pyrenees in your TL happens at the same time
(1659) as in OTL
Extremely unlikely. With Lou and Phil dead, Anne of Austria has her
role of Regent and Mazarin will be out of power (and probably either
out of France or out of his mortal shell). So any French-Spanish peace
will probably come at a different time and will look different.

and includes, as in OTL, a pardon for Conde, situation
Post by a***@hotmail.com
with succession becomes very ...er... interesting.
What if Conde gets from the Spaniards Luxemburg (IIRC, this was an
option in the case Louis refuse to pardon him) and makes his claim to
the throne of France from this position?
Very interesting, I agree.

Jörg
a***@hotmail.com
2006-10-16 23:28:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
What now? Gaston will be king, but probably very weak, and men like
Condé, Conti, Turenne, the Duc de Bouillon, even the Cardinal de Retz,
will compete for power - and that will also mean the marriage with
Anne, the Duchess of Montpensier.
Oh! Fun! Can she play the part of Margaret of Anjou in this particular
brand of the War of the Roses? Louis hated her living guts, but she
seems to have the begininngs of a reasonably talented person, unlike
her husband.
Well, her first request for royal permission to marry her OTL husband
came in 1670, apprently.
So I think we are safe to assume that this
relationship will be butterflied away. Wikipedia says that she even
thought of marrying the Prince of Wales (Charles II). Between 1652 and
1662, that might be at least possible.
And, IIRC, at some point there was a possibility of marriage to the
King of Poland. Not to mention various lesser dignitaries...
Do you happen to remember which king was meant?
IIRC, this was Wladislaw (whatever number) who eventually married Maria
Gonzaga. IIRC, less atractive as far as status and money are involved
but perhaps a lesser pain in the butt personality-wise. Not that her
fate as a queen was a very happy one: her 1st husband died soon
afterwards and her next husband, Jan-Casimir, did not have a peaceful
reign, to put it mildly.
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
But probably too much fun, even
if Salic Law bars Charles (if he is *restored) from claiming the throne
of France more directly than he did anyway by being King of England.
AFAIK, her main attraction was not a way to the throne but her immense
personal wealth.
In OTL, yes. After all, especially after 1661, her father was dead, the
king, his son and his brother alive. So her chances ever to claim the
throne are very slim. In this TL, the conditions are very different,
and whoever marries her may use her fortunes to pay for the way to the
throne.
I see your point. However, the prejudice against female succession were
still in place (AFAIK) so I have doubts about French version of
Victoria & Albert scenario. OTOH, if France would completely run out of
the possible male candidates, perhaps there would be a greater
pragmatism. How many prominent males have to be killed in your ATL to
create this situation? Could Lorraine family kick in if male Bourbons
died out?
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
[]
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
(BTW; if Salic Law is maintained, who
will be the heir of Gaston? The Bourbon line seems to end with his
death?)
Let's take a quick trip to the Almanch de Gotha.
Henri IV had children by Catherine Henriette de Balzac d'Entragues,
Gaston Henri, Duc de Verneuil, who was legitimized in 1603, two years
after his birth. He died in 1682, and about him, I know nothing.
Henri's other semi-legitimate children were girls or didn't live to
majority.
Henry's grandson, Duke de Beaufort, was one of the leaders of the
Fronde. Of course, there was a long way from being "King of the
Markets" to becoming the King of France. :-)
Post by Jörg
I am afraid that even the legitimized childern won't count much unless
they head a real superior army. Probably some Bourbon branch beyond
"Upon the accession to France's throne of Henry IV de Bourbon in 1589,
his first cousin-once-removed Henry, Prince of Condé (1588-1646),
was heir presumptive to the crown until 1601. [...] from 1589 to 1709
the Princes of Condé coincidentally held the rank at court of Premier
Prince du Sang Royal (First Prince of the Blood Royal), [...]"
So we can probably assume that Louis II Duc de Bourbon, "the Great
Condé" (as the then ruling eldest son of the Prince Henry mentioned
above) will claim to be the king once Gaston dies sonless. I can't say
whether his OTL death in 1660 will happen another tim in this TL.
Probably.
As I understand, the main problem with the Great Conde was his
personality. At some point he became a leader of a powerful party but,
thanks to his charming personality he managed to alienate almost
everybody from the parisians to Turenne (who initially supported him
but changed sides after it became clear that Conde is going to pursue
only his own interests).
Soon enough he found himself without any allies and had to join the
Spaniards.
OTL that happened in September 52. I agree, something similar seems
plausible during the Second Fronde of TTL as well. But that does not
mean that he doesn´t have a good claim once Gaston dies. If he is
still friendely with the Spaniards, they might decide to back him in a
last gamble to gain the upper hand over France by installing a puppet
king in Paris. Not that that will work as planned, probably.
Well, with Gaston dead and him being the 1st on the line, he could
probably easily change his alliances once more. Providing somebody else
did not manage to squeeze in while he was planning to became French
again. What about Conti?
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Unless the peace of the Pyrenees in your TL happens at the same time
(1659) as in OTL
Extremely unlikely. With Lou and Phil dead, Anne of Austria has her
role of Regent and Mazarin will be out of power (and probably either
out of France or out of his mortal shell). So any French-Spanish peace
will probably come at a different time and will look different.
Probably. The question is who would be a strong man behind Gaston's
throne.
If there is no such a figure, than France is going to be much weaker
than it was.
OTOH, Mazarin was a far cry from Richelieau so we are not talking some
political genius after all.
Post by Jörg
and includes, as in OTL, a pardon for Conde, situation
Post by a***@hotmail.com
with succession becomes very ...er... interesting.
What if Conde gets from the Spaniards Luxemburg (IIRC, this was an
option in the case Louis refuse to pardon him) and makes his claim to
the throne of France from this position?
Very interesting, I agree.
Jörg
Jörg
2006-10-17 00:24:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by Jörg
Anne, the Duchess of Montpensier.
And, IIRC, at some point there was a possibility of marriage to the
King of Poland. Not to mention various lesser dignitaries...
Do you happen to remember which king was meant?
IIRC, this was Wladislaw (whatever number) who eventually married Maria
Gonzaga. IIRC, less atractive as far as status and money are involved
but perhaps a lesser pain in the butt personality-wise. Not that her
fate as a queen was a very happy one: her 1st husband died soon
afterwards and her next husband, Jan-Casimir, did not have a peaceful
reign, to put it mildly.
Thank you.
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
But probably too much fun, even
if Salic Law bars Charles (if he is *restored) from claiming the throne
of France more directly than he did anyway by being King of England.
AFAIK, her main attraction was not a way to the throne but her immense
personal wealth.
In OTL, yes. After all, especially after 1661, her father was dead, the
king, his son and his brother alive. So her chances ever to claim the
throne are very slim. In this TL, the conditions are very different,
and whoever marries her may use her fortunes to pay for the way to the
throne.
I see your point. However, the prejudice against female succession were
still in place (AFAIK) so I have doubts about French version of
Victoria & Albert scenario.
More than prejudice. During the Hundred Years' War, the ancient Salic
Law was invoked (or, as some say, invented) to prevent inheritance
through female family members, ie. an uncle or his male descendants
would inherit before a daughter or her children, even male ones.
Technically, that was the law and it would greatly favor Condé. The
final decision would be probably left to the guns.
Post by a***@hotmail.com
OTOH, if France would completely run out of
the possible male candidates, perhaps there would be a greater
pragmatism. How many prominent males have to be killed in your ATL to
create this situation? Could Lorraine family kick in if male Bourbons
died out?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourbon_family_tree

If this chart is to be believed, once the Navarre branch has died out
with Gaston, the Princes of Condé (and Dukes of Bourbon) come next.
After that it's fuzzy.

But the House of Lorraine (and their [in]famous cadet branch, the
Guise) were no Capetians at all. They descend from some ancient counts
of Metz.
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
As I understand, the main problem with the Great Conde was his
personality. At some point he became a leader of a powerful party but,
thanks to his charming personality he managed to alienate almost
everybody from the parisians to Turenne (who initially supported him
but changed sides after it became clear that Conde is going to pursue
only his own interests).
Soon enough he found himself without any allies and had to join the
Spaniards.
OTL that happened in September 52. I agree, something similar seems
plausible during the Second Fronde of TTL as well. But that does not
mean that he doesn´t have a good claim once Gaston dies. If he is
still friendely with the Spaniards, they might decide to back him in a
last gamble to gain the upper hand over France by installing a puppet
king in Paris. Not that that will work as planned, probably.
Well, with Gaston dead and him being the 1st on the line, he could
probably easily change his alliances once more. Providing somebody else
did not manage to squeeze in while he was planning to became French
again. What about Conti?
He has good chances. He is Condé's younger brother, after all. By
strict male primogeniture, the line goes

1) Gaston
2) Louis II de Bourbon, Prince de Condé aka The Great Condé, cousin
of 1
3) Henri Jules, son of 2 (b.1643)
4) Armand de Bourbon, Prince de Conti; brother of 2

Plus, Conti is (seen as) weak and malformed, perhaps even slightly mad;
but not dangerously so. And he is two years younger than Anne, not that
much of a stretch, and his OTL 1654 marriage with Mazarin's niece will
certaimly not occur in this TL.

If I were Gaston and tried to keep the succession relatively smooth,
and would try to have the claims of Condé and his son voided for being
trairors and then give Anne to Conto as the next in line.

But that might or might not work.
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Unless the peace of the Pyrenees in your TL happens at the same time
(1659) as in OTL
Extremely unlikely. With Lou and Phil dead, Anne of Austria has her
role of Regent and Mazarin will be out of power (and probably either
out of France or out of his mortal shell). So any French-Spanish peace
will probably come at a different time and will look different.
Probably. The question is who would be a strong man behind Gaston's
throne.
If there is no such a figure, than France is going to be much weaker
than it was.
OTOH, Mazarin was a far cry from Richelieau so we are not talking some
political genius after all.
I agree. Fouquet is to closely linked to Mazarin to be eligible, I
guess, and the same goes for Colbert. Gaston will probably not be his
own minister of state, and if he his, he won´t be very good, I think.
Um - no, I don´t have any name ready. Unless he chooses another man of
the church and leading frondeur - Jean François Paul de Gondi,
Cardinal de Retz. Which would make France probably much weaker and more
peaceful.

Jörg
a***@hotmail.com
2006-10-17 19:22:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by Jörg
Anne, the Duchess of Montpensier.
And, IIRC, at some point there was a possibility of marriage to the
King of Poland. Not to mention various lesser dignitaries...
Do you happen to remember which king was meant?
IIRC, this was Wladislaw (whatever number) who eventually married Maria
Gonzaga. IIRC, less atractive as far as status and money are involved
but perhaps a lesser pain in the butt personality-wise. Not that her
fate as a queen was a very happy one: her 1st husband died soon
afterwards and her next husband, Jan-Casimir, did not have a peaceful
reign, to put it mildly.
Thank you.
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
But probably too much fun, even
if Salic Law bars Charles (if he is *restored) from claiming the throne
of France more directly than he did anyway by being King of England.
AFAIK, her main attraction was not a way to the throne but her immense
personal wealth.
In OTL, yes. After all, especially after 1661, her father was dead, the
king, his son and his brother alive. So her chances ever to claim the
throne are very slim. In this TL, the conditions are very different,
and whoever marries her may use her fortunes to pay for the way to the
throne.
I see your point. However, the prejudice against female succession were
still in place (AFAIK) so I have doubts about French version of
Victoria & Albert scenario.
More than prejudice. During the Hundred Years' War, the ancient Salic
Law was invoked (or, as some say, invented) to prevent inheritance
through female family members, ie. an uncle or his male descendants
would inherit before a daughter or her children, even male ones.
IIRC, it was invoked _before_ the 100YW with an explicit purpose to
prevent the King of England from getting the French crown as well.
Post by Jörg
Technically, that was the law and it would greatly favor Condé.
After Gaston dies without a male heir.
Post by Jörg
The
final decision would be probably left to the guns.
There could be at least 2 scenarios:

1. Conde gets crown just because he is entitled to it and everybody
accepts this (or opposition is too weak for a serious fight). Quite
possible but may involve a lot of under- and over the table bargaining
with the major players: IIRC, by this time Conde's circle of supporters
became dangerously small (thanks to his behavior). AFAIK, he was not a
very good negotiator but for the prize like France probably could force
himself to be nice and flexible. For a while.

2. Due to the fact that Conde is fighting on the wrong side, there is a
valid competitor (like Conti) who manages to get 'patriotic' party to
rally in his support. If there is enough of the top aristocrates who
consider Conde as a personally unsafe or unappealing choise and if
they manage to get backing in the major cities, esp. in Paris, then it
is up to the guns and, as in OTL, Conde and Spaniards are facing
Turenne. Battle at the Dunes or its equivalent. Conde is defeated and
spends the rest of his life as a Duke of Luxemburg. Of course, it must
be taken into an account that an issue of treason was not as clearly
cut as it is today and Conde could not be disqualify out of hand. After
all, quite a few people, including Gaston himself, had been in the
direct or indirect negotiations with Spain at one point or another. In
practical terms, this scenario could easily deterriorate into a more or
less protracted civil war with unclear outcome.

Side notice. It looks like the Spaniards had much more modern views on
the issue of treason than French. When Connetable de Bourbon came to
Spain after victory at Pavia and Charles V ordered one of the grandes
to lend him one of his palaces as a temporary residence, the answer was
that the king's order will be obeyed but, after Bourbon moves out, the
palace will be burned to the ground because owner can not live in the
place defiled by the presence of a traitor.
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
OTOH, if France would completely run out of
the possible male candidates, perhaps there would be a greater
pragmatism. How many prominent males have to be killed in your ATL to
create this situation? Could Lorraine family kick in if male Bourbons
died out?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourbon_family_tree
If this chart is to be believed, once the Navarre branch has died out
with Gaston, the Princes of Condé (and Dukes of Bourbon) come next.
After that it's fuzzy.
But the House of Lorraine (and their [in]famous cadet branch, the
Guise) were no Capetians at all. They descend from some ancient counts
of Metz.
Yes, but this did not prevent the Guises from considering themselves
potential candidates to the throne during the Wars of Religion (I'm not
sure if they ever made such a claim officially and they had a puppet
Bourbon king anyway but, IIRC, they made at least some noices to this
effect). If situation became really fuzzy, then it would be up to the
1st claimant with some supporting military orce and some popularity,
especially in Paris.
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
As I understand, the main problem with the Great Conde was his
personality. At some point he became a leader of a powerful party but,
thanks to his charming personality he managed to alienate almost
everybody from the parisians to Turenne (who initially supported him
but changed sides after it became clear that Conde is going to pursue
only his own interests).
Soon enough he found himself without any allies and had to join the
Spaniards.
OTL that happened in September 52. I agree, something similar seems
plausible during the Second Fronde of TTL as well. But that does not
mean that he doesn´t have a good claim once Gaston dies. If he is
still friendely with the Spaniards, they might decide to back him in a
last gamble to gain the upper hand over France by installing a puppet
king in Paris. Not that that will work as planned, probably.
Well, with Gaston dead and him being the 1st on the line, he could
probably easily change his alliances once more. Providing somebody else
did not manage to squeeze in while he was planning to became French
again. What about Conti?
He has good chances. He is Condé's younger brother, after all. By
strict male primogeniture, the line goes
1) Gaston
2) Louis II de Bourbon, Prince de Condé aka The Great Condé, cousin
of 1
3) Henri Jules, son of 2 (b.1643)
4) Armand de Bourbon, Prince de Conti; brother of 2
Plus, Conti is (seen as) weak and malformed, perhaps even slightly mad;
but not dangerously so. And he is two years younger than Anne, not that
much of a stretch, and his OTL 1654 marriage with Mazarin's niece will
certaimly not occur in this TL.
Here we go. :-)
Post by Jörg
If I were Gaston and tried to keep the succession relatively smooth,
and would try to have the claims of Condé and his son voided for being
trairors and then give Anne to Conto as the next in line.
But that might or might not work.
Depending on who supports whom.
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Unless the peace of the Pyrenees in your TL happens at the same time
(1659) as in OTL
Extremely unlikely. With Lou and Phil dead, Anne of Austria has her
role of Regent and Mazarin will be out of power (and probably either
out of France or out of his mortal shell). So any French-Spanish peace
will probably come at a different time and will look different.
Probably. The question is who would be a strong man behind Gaston's
throne.
If there is no such a figure, than France is going to be much weaker
than it was.
OTOH, Mazarin was a far cry from Richelieau so we are not talking some
political genius after all.
I agree. Fouquet is to closely linked to Mazarin to be eligible,
And don't have cardinal's rank to make him a respected figure. Just
money.
Post by Jörg
I
guess, and the same goes for Colbert.
IIRC, Colbert was not a prominent figure by this time. His elevation
would be Gaston's work. But it would be much easier for the enemies to
deal with a humble clerk elevated into a cabinet position than with a
minister who is a prince of the Church. Both Richelieau and Mazarin
played their Church card rather well.
Post by Jörg
Gaston will probably not be his
own minister of state, and if he his, he won´t be very good, I think.
No reason to think otherwise.
Post by Jörg
Um - no, I don´t have any name ready. Unless he chooses another man of
the church and leading frondeur - Jean François Paul de Gondi,
Cardinal de Retz. Which would make France probably much weaker and more
peaceful.
Was he anything besides being a capable intrigant?
Jörg
2006-10-17 22:21:52 UTC
Permalink
[lots of snips]
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Technically, that was the law and it would greatly favor Condé.
After Gaston dies without a male heir.
Yes, that would be necessary. But any son of Gaston would be still
minor (and unable to sire legitimate sons himself) for circa a decade.
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
The
final decision would be probably left to the guns.
1. Conde gets crown just because he is entitled to it and everybody
accepts this (or opposition is too weak for a serious fight). Quite
possible but may involve a lot of under- and over the table bargaining
with the major players: IIRC, by this time Conde's circle of supporters
became dangerously small (thanks to his behavior). AFAIK, he was not a
very good negotiator but for the prize like France probably could force
himself to be nice and flexible. For a while.
Possible, but not so probable. And boring ...
Post by a***@hotmail.com
2. Due to the fact that Conde is fighting on the wrong side, there is a
valid competitor (like Conti) who manages to get 'patriotic' party to
rally in his support. If there is enough of the top aristocrates who
consider Conde as a personally unsafe or unappealing choise and if
they manage to get backing in the major cities, esp. in Paris, then it
is up to the guns and, as in OTL, Conde and Spaniards are facing
Turenne. Battle at the Dunes or its equivalent. Conde is defeated and
spends the rest of his life as a Duke of Luxemburg. Of course, it must
be taken into an account that an issue of treason was not as clearly
cut as it is today and Conde could not be disqualify out of hand. After
all, quite a few people, including Gaston himself, had been in the
direct or indirect negotiations with Spain at one point or another. In
practical terms, this scenario could easily deterriorate into a more or
less protracted civil war with unclear outcome.
Yes, I think so.
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Side notice. It looks like the Spaniards had much more modern views on
the issue of treason than French. When Connetable de Bourbon came to
Spain after victory at Pavia and Charles V ordered one of the grandes
to lend him one of his palaces as a temporary residence, the answer was
that the king's order will be obeyed but, after Bourbon moves out, the
palace will be burned to the ground because owner can not live in the
place defiled by the presence of a traitor.
Whereas Chales V himself had no qualms about using Bourbon.
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
But the House of Lorraine (and their [in]famous cadet branch, the
Guise) were no Capetians at all. They descend from some ancient counts
of Metz.
Yes, but this did not prevent the Guises from considering themselves
potential candidates to the throne during the Wars of Religion (I'm not
sure if they ever made such a claim officially and they had a puppet
Bourbon king anyway but, IIRC, they made at least some noices to this
effect).
Outwardly they supported the claim of Charles de Bourbon, the
Archbishop of Rouen; but apparently Henri Ier de Guise (one of the
three Henrys) tried to find supporters for his claim that his (ie the
Lorraine) descent from Charlemagne would qualify him for becoming the
king. Without much success, obviously.
Post by a***@hotmail.com
If situation became really fuzzy, then it would be up to the
1st claimant with some supporting military orce and some popularity,
especially in Paris.
Obviously. Political power comes from the muzzle of the musket.

[snip]
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Probably. The question is who would be a strong man behind Gaston's
throne.
If there is no such a figure, than France is going to be much weaker
than it was.
OTOH, Mazarin was a far cry from Richelieau so we are not talking some
political genius after all.
I agree. Fouquet is to closely linked to Mazarin to be eligible,
And don't have cardinal's rank to make him a respected figure. Just
money.
And a fatal tendency to show off blatantly. In some ways this noble de
robe reminds me of the (in)famous rich freedmen of imperial Rome, and
presumably the older aristocracy viewed Fouquet with the same feelings.
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
I
guess, and the same goes for Colbert.
IIRC, Colbert was not a prominent figure by this time. His elevation
would be Gaston's work. But it would be much easier for the enemies to
deal with a humble clerk elevated into a cabinet position than with a
minister who is a prince of the Church. Both Richelieau and Mazarin
played their Church card rather well.
Post by Jörg
Gaston will probably not be his
own minister of state, and if he his, he won´t be very good, I think.
No reason to think otherwise.
Post by Jörg
Um - no, I don´t have any name ready. Unless he chooses another man of
the church and leading frondeur - Jean François Paul de Gondi,
Cardinal de Retz. Which would make France probably much weaker and more
peaceful.
Was he anything besides being a capable intrigant?
Well, he seems to have been a good orator and demagogue.
Plus, the Gondi were originally bankers from Florence, even if the
cardinal was born and bred iin France. A shrewd king could use this as
a built-in guarantee that the chief minister should not get too strong,
or there might be a public demand for the dismissal of the "foreigner"
- the fate of Giulio Mazarini will be fresh in everyone's mind in this
TL.
It does not sound like he would be an extremely capable minister, but
just an acceptable. Which might be enough - for him, even if not for
the power and glory of France.

Jörg
a***@hotmail.com
2006-10-18 18:54:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Technically, that was the law and it would greatly favor Condé.
After Gaston dies without a male heir.
Yes, that would be necessary. But any son of Gaston would be still
minor (and unable to sire legitimate sons himself) for circa a decade.
Taking into an account that Louis XIII and Louis XIV had been children
when they accessed the throne, this would not be a technical problem.
An identity of a regent is another subject.
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
The
final decision would be probably left to the guns.
1. Conde gets crown just because he is entitled to it and everybody
accepts this (or opposition is too weak for a serious fight). Quite
possible but may involve a lot of under- and over the table bargaining
with the major players: IIRC, by this time Conde's circle of supporters
became dangerously small (thanks to his behavior). AFAIK, he was not a
very good negotiator but for the prize like France probably could force
himself to be nice and flexible. For a while.
Possible, but not so probable. And boring ...
I suspect that quite a few people in France of this time would gladly
choose a boring option as an alternative to the in the interesting
times. :-)
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Side notice. It looks like the Spaniards had much more modern views on
the issue of treason than French. When Connetable de Bourbon came to
Spain after victory at Pavia and Charles V ordered one of the grandes
to lend him one of his palaces as a temporary residence, the answer was
that the king's order will be obeyed but, after Bourbon moves out, the
palace will be burned to the ground because owner can not live in the
place defiled by the presence of a traitor.
Whereas Chales V himself had no qualms about using Bourbon.
Charles could not afford principles to stay on the way of expediency.
:-)

After all, being The Most Christian King did not prevent Francouis I
from being in league with the Sultan against the Catholic King who, in
his turn, did not have any moral problems with using Protestant German
troops to attack the Pope.


[]
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Yes, but this did not prevent the Guises from considering themselves
potential candidates to the throne during the Wars of Religion (I'm not
sure if they ever made such a claim officially and they had a puppet
Bourbon king anyway but, IIRC, they made at least some noices to this
effect).
Outwardly they supported the claim of Charles de Bourbon, the
Archbishop of Rouen; but apparently Henri Ier de Guise (one of the
three Henrys) tried to find supporters for his claim that his (ie the
Lorraine) descent from Charlemagne would qualify him for becoming the
king. Without much success, obviously.
Indeed. Being assasinated seriously damaged his chances for success....
Post by Jörg
[snip]
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Probably. The question is who would be a strong man behind Gaston's
throne.
If there is no such a figure, than France is going to be much weaker
than it was.
OTOH, Mazarin was a far cry from Richelieau so we are not talking some
political genius after all.
I agree. Fouquet is to closely linked to Mazarin to be eligible,
And don't have cardinal's rank to make him a respected figure. Just
money.
And a fatal tendency to show off blatantly.
As one writer commented, a person who displayed the coat of arms saying
"How much higher will I climb?" (or something like this) for Louis XIV
to see, could just as well to cut his own throat...
Post by Jörg
In some ways this noble de
robe reminds me of the (in)famous rich freedmen of imperial Rome, and
presumably the older aristocracy viewed Fouquet with the same feelings.
And, not having protection of the high spiritual rank, he was extremely
vulnerable.
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Um - no, I don´t have any name ready. Unless he chooses another man of
the church and leading frondeur - Jean François Paul de Gondi,
Cardinal de Retz. Which would make France probably much weaker and more
peaceful.
Was he anything besides being a capable intrigant?
Well, he seems to have been a good orator and demagogue.
Yes, judging by his role during the Fronde. Probably would make a good
career in a democratic society. :-)
Post by Jörg
Plus, the Gondi were originally bankers from Florence, even if the
cardinal was born and bred iin France. A shrewd king could use this as
a built-in guarantee that the chief minister should not get too strong,
or there might be a public demand for the dismissal of the "foreigner"
- the fate of Giulio Mazarini will be fresh in everyone's mind in this
TL.
It does not sound like he would be an extremely capable minister, but
just an acceptable. Which might be enough - for him, even if not for
the power and glory of France.
It is always an open question if a powerful minister (at least in the
absolute monarchy) is, under the normal circumstances, better than a
moderately capable one.
Jörg
2006-10-18 20:44:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Technically, that was the law and it would greatly favor Condé.
After Gaston dies without a male heir.
Yes, that would be necessary. But any son of Gaston would be still
minor (and unable to sire legitimate sons himself) for circa a decade.
Taking into an account that Louis XIII and Louis XIV had been children
when they accessed the throne, this would not be a technical problem.
An identity of a regent is another subject.
I have the feeling that La Grande Mademoiselle (well, technically she
wouldn´t be that anymore) would have ambitions to act as regent. The
"traditional" solution would be Queen Marguerite, but I cannot find
anything about her character or politics.
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
The
final decision would be probably left to the guns.
1. Conde gets crown just because he is entitled to it and everybody
accepts this (or opposition is too weak for a serious fight). Quite
possible but may involve a lot of under- and over the table bargaining
with the major players: IIRC, by this time Conde's circle of supporters
became dangerously small (thanks to his behavior). AFAIK, he was not a
very good negotiator but for the prize like France probably could force
himself to be nice and flexible. For a while.
Possible, but not so probable. And boring ...
I suspect that quite a few people in France of this time would gladly
choose a boring option as an alternative to the in the interesting
times. :-)
;-)
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Side notice. It looks like the Spaniards had much more modern views on
the issue of treason than French. When Connetable de Bourbon came to
Spain after victory at Pavia and Charles V ordered one of the grandes
to lend him one of his palaces as a temporary residence, the answer was
that the king's order will be obeyed but, after Bourbon moves out, the
palace will be burned to the ground because owner can not live in the
place defiled by the presence of a traitor.
Whereas Chales V himself had no qualms about using Bourbon.
Charles could not afford principles to stay on the way of expediency.
:-)
After all, being The Most Christian King did not prevent Francouis I
from being in league with the Sultan against the Catholic King who, in
his turn, did not have any moral problems with using Protestant German
troops to attack the Pope.
The Sacco di Roma seems a generally underused event in shwi, IMO.
Post by a***@hotmail.com
[]
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Yes, but this did not prevent the Guises from considering themselves
potential candidates to the throne during the Wars of Religion (I'm not
sure if they ever made such a claim officially and they had a puppet
Bourbon king anyway but, IIRC, they made at least some noices to this
effect).
Outwardly they supported the claim of Charles de Bourbon, the
Archbishop of Rouen; but apparently Henri Ier de Guise (one of the
three Henrys) tried to find supporters for his claim that his (ie the
Lorraine) descent from Charlemagne would qualify him for becoming the
king. Without much success, obviously.
Indeed. Being assasinated seriously damaged his chances for success....
And I have my doubt that it would have been convincing otherwise.
Unless he has such a firm grip on the power that his imperrial descent
is just needed as window dressing.
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
[snip]
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Probably. The question is who would be a strong man behind Gaston's
throne.
If there is no such a figure, than France is going to be much weaker
than it was.
OTOH, Mazarin was a far cry from Richelieau so we are not talking some
political genius after all.
I agree. Fouquet is to closely linked to Mazarin to be eligible,
And don't have cardinal's rank to make him a respected figure. Just
money.
And a fatal tendency to show off blatantly.
As one writer commented, a person who displayed the coat of arms saying
"How much higher will I climb?" (or something like this) for Louis XIV
to see, could just as well to cut his own throat...
Post by Jörg
In some ways this noble de
robe reminds me of the (in)famous rich freedmen of imperial Rome, and
presumably the older aristocracy viewed Fouquet with the same feelings.
And, not having protection of the high spiritual rank, he was extremely
vulnerable.
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Um - no, I don´t have any name ready. Unless he chooses another man of
the church and leading frondeur - Jean François Paul de Gondi,
Cardinal de Retz. Which would make France probably much weaker and more
peaceful.
Was he anything besides being a capable intrigant?
Well, he seems to have been a good orator and demagogue.
Yes, judging by his role during the Fronde. Probably would make a good
career in a democratic society. :-)
Well, he was closer to the court in the first mopnths of the second
Fronde than I thought previously, buit not close to Mazarin. He seems
to have had more chances of the top post than I expected, had luck
favored him.

Jörg
a***@hotmail.com
2006-10-19 13:46:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Taking into an account that Louis XIII and Louis XIV had been children
when they accessed the throne, this would not be a technical problem.
An identity of a regent is another subject.
I have the feeling that La Grande Mademoiselle (well, technically she
wouldn´t be that anymore) would have ambitions to act as regent. The
"traditional" solution would be Queen Marguerite, but I cannot find
anything about her character or politics.
Well, AFAIK, not too much can be said about the GM as a potential
regent except that when she was young, she was a resolute and strong
willed woman (as quite a few of her social class at this time). Her
'taking' Orleans was a spectacular adventure but her order to fire at
the royal troops tells rather about her dedication to the cause than
about her brain.

An obvious WI:

Officer in charge of Bastille refused to follow her order during the
battle of the Faurbourg Saint Antoine (let's assume that the gates are
still open). The defeated Conde's troops are trying to get through the
gates while pursued by unopposed royalists. The gates are jammed by a
pressure of people and horses. In all this confusion Conde, who as
usual had fought with the most desperate bravery, is shot. Fronde is
deprived of its most capable general.

What's next?

It is possible that Turenne's troops managed to get into the city while
chasing the defeated and leaderless Conde's troops and there is no new
siege of Paris. In any case, Conde's death is a serious blow to the
Fronde.

Being a little bit dead, Conde does not serve in the Spanish army
(which, in a long run, did not make too much difference) but what is
more important, he does not serve to Louis XIV. In OTL he proposed and
executed plan for seizing Franche-Comte, was Turenne's collegue at
campaign of 1672 against the Dutch, managed to achieve a draw (or
victory, depending on a point of view) at Seneffe with 45,000 against
60,000 (and loosing 8,000 vs 11,000). In 1675, after Turennes's death
he managed to stop Montecuccoli. What would be different with Conde out
of picture?

Another possible POD is that Conde survives but Louis XIV did not veto
his candidacy to the throne of Poland in 1674. Would this make a
noticeable change in the affairs of the Eastern Europe? In OTL, by
1683 (battle of Vienna) Sobiesski was 54 and in his prime as a military
commander but Conde was 62, and worn out by gout. Of course, after his
victory at Chochim, Sobiesski was enormously popular in Poland and, in
OTL, was elected with a minimal opposition. However, a famous general
like Conde could make at least a decent competition. Of course, _if_ he
wins, Poland being what it was at this time, his relations with the
powerful and ambitious military leader like Sobiesski may make his
reign really interesting....
frédéric haessig
2006-10-18 04:57:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
More than prejudice. During the Hundred Years' War, the ancient Salic
Law was invoked (or, as some say, invented) to prevent inheritance
through female family members, ie. an uncle or his male descendants
would inherit before a daughter or her children, even male ones.
IIRC, it was invoked _before_ the 100YW with an explicit purpose to
prevent the King of England from getting the French crown as well.
Actually, the Salic law was unearthed/created for the explicit purpose of
keeping Jeanne, the ( likely bastard ) daughter of Louis X - and her
burgundy maternal relatives - from getting the throne of France. The english
claim never had any legal substance, except from support of longbows. If the
salic laws applies they were disqualified; if it doesn't apply, the
descendents of of Jeanne have a better claim.
j***@gmail.com
2006-10-19 12:37:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by frédéric haessig
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
More than prejudice. During the Hundred Years' War, the ancient Salic
Law was invoked (or, as some say, invented) to prevent inheritance
through female family members, ie. an uncle or his male descendants
would inherit before a daughter or her children, even male ones.
IIRC, it was invoked _before_ the 100YW with an explicit purpose to
prevent the King of England from getting the French crown as well.
Actually, the Salic law was unearthed/created for the explicit purpose of
keeping Jeanne, the ( likely bastard ) daughter of Louis X - and her
burgundy maternal relatives - from getting the throne of France. The english
claim never had any legal substance, except from support of longbows. If the
salic laws applies they were disqualified; if it doesn't apply, the
descendents of of Jeanne have a better claim.
The English claim in 1328 was that while 1316 had established that
women could not inherit, it had not established that women couldn't
transmit claims to their sons. Since none of the daughters of the sons
of Philip IV had sons as yet, that left Edward III and his brother as
the only male descendants of Philip IV. It was then that the full
Salic Law was clearly established.
frédéric haessig
2006-10-22 14:30:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@gmail.com
The English claim in 1328 was that while 1316 had established that
women could not inherit, it had not established that women couldn't
transmit claims to their sons. Since none of the daughters of the sons
of Philip IV had sons as yet, that left Edward III and his brother as
the only male descendants of Philip IV. It was then that the full
Salic Law was clearly established.
And , under that interpretation, as soon as said daughters gave birth to
boys - or their daughters did -, the ruling king becomes illegitimate.
.......

How likely are those women to ove, do you think?
j***@gmail.com
2006-10-23 02:01:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by frédéric haessig
Post by j***@gmail.com
The English claim in 1328 was that while 1316 had established that
women could not inherit, it had not established that women couldn't
transmit claims to their sons. Since none of the daughters of the sons
of Philip IV had sons as yet, that left Edward III and his brother as
the only male descendants of Philip IV. It was then that the full
Salic Law was clearly established.
And , under that interpretation, as soon as said daughters gave birth to
boys - or their daughters did -, the ruling king becomes illegitimate.
.......
How likely are those women to ove, do you think?
Yes, it wasn't a terribly logical position, but nobody has ever accused
medieval royal succession of being terribly logical.

j***@gmail.com
2006-10-17 23:35:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@hotmail.com
I see your point. However, the prejudice against female succession were
still in place (AFAIK) so I have doubts about French version of
Victoria & Albert scenario. OTOH, if France would completely run out of
the possible male candidates, perhaps there would be a greater
pragmatism. How many prominent males have to be killed in your ATL to
create this situation?
1. Louis XIV
2. Monsieur, brother to the king
3. Gaston, uncle to the king
4. Condé, First Prince of the Blood
5. Enghien, Condé's son
6. Conti, Condé's brother

That's it. It's worth noting that at this point, the Capetian line is
not extinct...see below for more.
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Could Lorraine family kick in if male Bourbons died out?
I believe that Louis XIV would later sign a treaty with the Duke of
Lorraine saying that the Lorraines would get the throne after the
Condés. This was rejected by the Parlements as illegal...

Although the Bourbon line ends with the Condés, the legitimate
Capetian line does not. There survive the Courtenays, petty noble
descendants of the youngest son of Louis VI. Throughout the 17th
century (when the Bourbon line was thin enough that it seemed possible
they would become the heirs male of Hugh Capet) they tried to get
themselves recognized as Princes of the Blood, but were rejected, both
by the King and by the Parlements.

I believe the official Parlementary position was that if the Bourbons
died out, an Estates General would have be convened to choose a new
dynasty. *That* would be interesting.

I'm not sure who's in a good position if all the Bourbons die out. I'd
say the Lorraines or the Savoys would have the best shot, as
French-speaking dynasties, closely related to the royal house, and of
equal dignity to it (or, at least, as close to equal dignity as one
could get to the House of France) whose own lands were not large enough
to pose a threat to French independence - it would be a case of France
annexing Lorraine or Savoy, not of France being annexed by a foreign
country. Charles Emmanuel of Savoy seems like a good bet in this time
period, since he is a grandson of Henri IV - especially if he's married
to Anne of Montpensier. Another possibility would be a member of one
of the "foreign dynasties" in France - like the Dukes of Guise or
Nemours, who were cadet members of foreign dynasties, but settled in
France. I think a marriage with one of Gaston's daughters would be the
best way for one of them to get in, though.
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
OTL that happened in September 52. I agree, something similar seems
plausible during the Second Fronde of TTL as well. But that does not
mean that he doesn´t have a good claim once Gaston dies. If he is
still friendely with the Spaniards, they might decide to back him in a
last gamble to gain the upper hand over France by installing a puppet
king in Paris. Not that that will work as planned, probably.
Well, with Gaston dead and him being the 1st on the line, he could
probably easily change his alliances once more. Providing somebody else
did not manage to squeeze in while he was planning to became French
again. What about Conti?
As I've noted before, I think the Salic Law is pretty engrained in
France by the 1650s. Henri IV was *Protestant* and managed to get the
throne largely on the basis of his indisputable Salic Law claim - and
that was a claim based on a descent from a ruler who died in *1270*!
If Condé is the heir, he's the heir, unless he does something
monumentally stupid. This is possible, but seems unlikely to me.
Remember that only a few decades later the French legal experts were
basically saying that Philip V *couldn't* renounce his claim to the
French throne
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Unless the peace of the Pyrenees in your TL happens at the same time
(1659) as in OTL
Extremely unlikely. With Lou and Phil dead, Anne of Austria has her
role of Regent and Mazarin will be out of power (and probably either
out of France or out of his mortal shell). So any French-Spanish peace
will probably come at a different time and will look different.
Probably. The question is who would be a strong man behind Gaston's
throne.
If there is no such a figure, than France is going to be much weaker
than it was.
OTOH, Mazarin was a far cry from Richelieau so we are not talking some
political genius after all.
I don't think it will be hard to find. And I think the more unassuming
of those who worked for Mazarin will be in a decent position to
continue on under Gaston. Remember that Richelieu started off as Marie
de Medici's protege, and nonetheless ended up as her son's prime
minister. I don't see why one of Mazarin's proteges can't make a
similar switch.
Jörg
2006-10-18 01:26:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by a***@hotmail.com
I see your point. However, the prejudice against female succession were
still in place (AFAIK) so I have doubts about French version of
Victoria & Albert scenario. OTOH, if France would completely run out of
the possible male candidates, perhaps there would be a greater
pragmatism. How many prominent males have to be killed in your ATL to
create this situation?
1. Louis XIV
2. Monsieur, brother to the king
3. Gaston, uncle to the king
4. Condé, First Prince of the Blood
5. Enghien, Condé's son
6. Conti, Condé's brother
That's it. It's worth noting that at this point, the Capetian line is
not extinct...see below for more.
But I would like to note that even if it comes to some kind of
full-blown civil war with assassination attempts left and right, it is
really unlikely that all of them die.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Could Lorraine family kick in if male Bourbons died out?
I believe that Louis XIV would later sign a treaty with the Duke of
Lorraine saying that the Lorraines would get the throne after the
Condés. This was rejected by the Parlements as illegal...
But in this TL, it might help that the second wife of King Gaston was a
Lorraine. Maybe. Hm. In 1659, Charles IV of Lorraine dies. So that
would be his brother Nicolas, or Nicolas' son Charles V Leopold, right?
I have trouble finding out when exactly and how often Charles IV and
Nicolas resigned or swapped the ducal title.

BTW, two questions concerning Gaston: How likely is it that his
banishment to Blois has affected his time of death? Will he die the
same time if he is king, or presumably earlier (more stress, even more
indulging) or later (better overall care)?
And - will he reign as King Gaston or as King Jean III? The latter
title, taken from his second name of Jean-Baptiste sounds more regal,
especially as the last one was known as Jean le Bon, apparently.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Although the Bourbon line ends with the Condés, the legitimate
Capetian line does not. There survive the Courtenays, petty noble
descendants of the youngest son of Louis VI. Throughout the 17th
century (when the Bourbon line was thin enough that it seemed possible
they would become the heirs male of Hugh Capet) they tried to get
themselves recognized as Princes of the Blood, but were rejected, both
by the King and by the Parlements.
Thank you. I had tried finding it out via
http://genealogy.euweb.cz/capet/index.html
but I find the page a bit confusing.
Post by j***@gmail.com
I believe the official Parlementary position was that if the Bourbons
died out, an Estates General would have be convened to choose a new
dynasty. *That* would be interesting.
Oh, yes.
Post by j***@gmail.com
I'm not sure who's in a good position if all the Bourbons die out. I'd
say the Lorraines or the Savoys would have the best shot, as
French-speaking dynasties, closely related to the royal house, and of
equal dignity to it (or, at least, as close to equal dignity as one
could get to the House of France) whose own lands were not large enough
to pose a threat to French independence - it would be a case of France
annexing Lorraine or Savoy, not of France being annexed by a foreign
country. Charles Emmanuel of Savoy seems like a good bet in this time
period, since he is a grandson of Henri IV - especially if he's married
to Anne of Montpensier.
It seems that he would have better odds than the Duke of Lorraine; I
think.

Another possibility would be a member of one
Post by j***@gmail.com
of the "foreign dynasties" in France - like the Dukes of Guise or
Nemours, who were cadet members of foreign dynasties, but settled in
France. I think a marriage with one of Gaston's daughters would be the
best way for one of them to get in, though.
Isn`t the ducal line of Nemours (the Savoy cadet branch) already ending
in 1659?
The House of Guise won´t have long, either, but that is impossible to
foretell in c.1660. But I have the feeling that their name is something
of a burden after the mid-16th century.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
OTL that happened in September 52. I agree, something similar seems
plausible during the Second Fronde of TTL as well. But that does not
mean that he doesn´t have a good claim once Gaston dies. If he is
still friendely with the Spaniards, they might decide to back him in a
last gamble to gain the upper hand over France by installing a puppet
king in Paris. Not that that will work as planned, probably.
Well, with Gaston dead and him being the 1st on the line, he could
probably easily change his alliances once more. Providing somebody else
did not manage to squeeze in while he was planning to became French
again. What about Conti?
As I've noted before, I think the Salic Law is pretty engrained in
France by the 1650s. Henri IV was *Protestant* and managed to get the
throne largely on the basis of his indisputable Salic Law claim - and
that was a claim based on a descent from a ruler who died in *1270*!
If Condé is the heir, he's the heir, unless he does something
monumentally stupid. This is possible, but seems unlikely to me.
OTOH, how long did it take Henri IV to get to the throne? He became
heir in 1584 and nominal king in 1589, but he still had to fight until
1594. So, even if Condé has the law on his side, there might still be
huge obstacles before he can feel the Saint Chrême on his skin.

And if he dies in the field?
Then it comes to his son Henri Jules, the Duke d'Enghien. The
Britannica says: "A little man, interested in the arts, the sciences,
and technology, an able courtier and a magnificent host, he was
eccentric, given to malicious practical jokes, and a terror to his wife
and children. In his last years he was mentally quite deranged."

And the French wikipedia quotes Saint-Simon:
« Fils dénaturé, cruel père, mari terrible, maître détestable,
pernicieux voisin, sans amitié, sans amis, incapable d'en avoir,
jaloux, soupçonneux, inquiet sans aucune relâche, plein de manèges
et d'artifices à découvrir et à scruter tout, à quoi il était
occupé sans cesse. »
Il était atteint de lycanthropie, mal que l'on attribuait à
l'hérédité de sa mère. Saint-Simon explique ainsi : « on disait
tout bas qu'il y avait des temps où tantôt il se croyait chien,
tantôt quelque autre bête, dont il imitait les façons. »

Great. Mad King Henri V (or VI) the Lycanthrope, believing himself to
be a dog or wolf. Wasn´t he the one running around, trying to bite
peasants or servants?
Post by j***@gmail.com
Remember that only a few decades later the French legal experts were
basically saying that Philip V *couldn't* renounce his claim to the
French throne
Especially the current Legitimist ones, I think ...
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Unless the peace of the Pyrenees in your TL happens at the same time
(1659) as in OTL
Extremely unlikely. With Lou and Phil dead, Anne of Austria has her
role of Regent and Mazarin will be out of power (and probably either
out of France or out of his mortal shell). So any French-Spanish peace
will probably come at a different time and will look different.
Probably. The question is who would be a strong man behind Gaston's
throne.
If there is no such a figure, than France is going to be much weaker
than it was.
OTOH, Mazarin was a far cry from Richelieau so we are not talking some
political genius after all.
I don't think it will be hard to find. And I think the more unassuming
of those who worked for Mazarin will be in a decent position to
continue on under Gaston. Remember that Richelieu started off as Marie
de Medici's protege, and nonetheless ended up as her son's prime
minister. I don't see why one of Mazarin's proteges can't make a
similar switch.
Might happen, yes.

Thanks,
Jörg
j***@gmail.com
2006-10-18 02:13:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by a***@hotmail.com
I see your point. However, the prejudice against female succession were
still in place (AFAIK) so I have doubts about French version of
Victoria & Albert scenario. OTOH, if France would completely run out of
the possible male candidates, perhaps there would be a greater
pragmatism. How many prominent males have to be killed in your ATL to
create this situation?
1. Louis XIV
2. Monsieur, brother to the king
3. Gaston, uncle to the king
4. Condé, First Prince of the Blood
5. Enghien, Condé's son
6. Conti, Condé's brother
That's it. It's worth noting that at this point, the Capetian line is
not extinct...see below for more.
But I would like to note that even if it comes to some kind of
full-blown civil war with assassination attempts left and right, it is
really unlikely that all of them die.
I would agree. Hard to manage.
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Could Lorraine family kick in if male Bourbons died out?
I believe that Louis XIV would later sign a treaty with the Duke of
Lorraine saying that the Lorraines would get the throne after the
Condés. This was rejected by the Parlements as illegal...
But in this TL, it might help that the second wife of King Gaston was a
Lorraine. Maybe. Hm. In 1659, Charles IV of Lorraine dies. So that
would be his brother Nicolas, or Nicolas' son Charles V Leopold, right?
I have trouble finding out when exactly and how often Charles IV and
Nicolas resigned or swapped the ducal title.
Charles IV did not die until 1675. My understanding is that he came to
the throne in 1624, abdicated in favor of his brother in 1634, then
returned in 1661. It was occupied by the French in 1670, and Charles
went into exile. He died in 1675, and his nephew Charles V succeeded
him as 1675, but in name only. He was supposed to be able to return
after the Peace of Nijmegen, but the French didn't withdraw, and he
stayed in Austria, where he commanded the Austrian part of the army
that relieved Vienna in 1683. He died in 1690, and was succeeded
nominally by his son Leopold Joseph, who was finally restored by the
Peace of Ryswick in 1697. Although the Duchy was again occupied during
the Spanish Succession war, the Duke was allowed to stay.
Post by Jörg
BTW, two questions concerning Gaston: How likely is it that his
banishment to Blois has affected his time of death? Will he die the
same time if he is king, or presumably earlier (more stress, even more
indulging) or later (better overall care)?
And - will he reign as King Gaston or as King Jean III? The latter
title, taken from his second name of Jean-Baptiste sounds more regal,
especially as the last one was known as Jean le Bon, apparently.
Jean le Bon had one of the most disastrous reigns in French history -
he was the one captured at Poitiers. Jean was considered a highly
unlikely name, I believe, much as it was in England. On the other hand
"Gaston" is a ridiculous name for a king. I suppose he might take some
entirely new name - the most plausible, I think, would be "Henri," to
remind people of his beloved father.
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
Although the Bourbon line ends with the Condés, the legitimate
Capetian line does not. There survive the Courtenays, petty noble
descendants of the youngest son of Louis VI. Throughout the 17th
century (when the Bourbon line was thin enough that it seemed possible
they would become the heirs male of Hugh Capet) they tried to get
themselves recognized as Princes of the Blood, but were rejected, both
by the King and by the Parlements.
Thank you. I had tried finding it out via
http://genealogy.euweb.cz/capet/index.html
but I find the page a bit confusing.
Post by j***@gmail.com
I believe the official Parlementary position was that if the Bourbons
died out, an Estates General would have be convened to choose a new
dynasty. *That* would be interesting.
Oh, yes.
Post by j***@gmail.com
I'm not sure who's in a good position if all the Bourbons die out. I'd
say the Lorraines or the Savoys would have the best shot, as
French-speaking dynasties, closely related to the royal house, and of
equal dignity to it (or, at least, as close to equal dignity as one
could get to the House of France) whose own lands were not large enough
to pose a threat to French independence - it would be a case of France
annexing Lorraine or Savoy, not of France being annexed by a foreign
country. Charles Emmanuel of Savoy seems like a good bet in this time
period, since he is a grandson of Henri IV - especially if he's married
to Anne of Montpensier.
It seems that he would have better odds than the Duke of Lorraine; I
think.
Nicolas was not a terribly effectual ruler, I don't think - my
understanding is that he was a defrocked Cardinal who was forced to
marry because the French wanted his brother, who was seen as
anti-French and pro-Spanish, out on the eve of the Franco-Spanish war.


Note that Charles abdicates just before the war starts, and returns
just after it ends. He might be a plausible "Spanish" candidate in the
event of an Estates General. Also note that, though he's much older
than her (b.1604), he is a potential husband for Anne after his
estranged first wife dies in 1657(his illegally married second wife can
be disposed of without difficulty, I think)
Post by Jörg
Another possibility would be a member of one
Post by j***@gmail.com
of the "foreign dynasties" in France - like the Dukes of Guise or
Nemours, who were cadet members of foreign dynasties, but settled in
France. I think a marriage with one of Gaston's daughters would be the
best way for one of them to get in, though.
Isn`t the ducal line of Nemours (the Savoy cadet branch) already ending
in 1659?
Not sure - there was also a Gonzaga cadet branch in Nevers, maybe? I
get confused between all of them. Prince Eugene was from a Savoy cadet
branch in, er, Soissons, maybe?
Post by Jörg
The House of Guise won´t have long, either, but that is impossible to
foretell in c.1660. But I have the feeling that their name is something
of a burden after the mid-16th century.
Yes, most likely. Or after 1594, at least.
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
OTL that happened in September 52. I agree, something similar seems
plausible during the Second Fronde of TTL as well. But that does not
mean that he doesn´t have a good claim once Gaston dies. If he is
still friendely with the Spaniards, they might decide to back him in a
last gamble to gain the upper hand over France by installing a puppet
king in Paris. Not that that will work as planned, probably.
Well, with Gaston dead and him being the 1st on the line, he could
probably easily change his alliances once more. Providing somebody else
did not manage to squeeze in while he was planning to became French
again. What about Conti?
As I've noted before, I think the Salic Law is pretty engrained in
France by the 1650s. Henri IV was *Protestant* and managed to get the
throne largely on the basis of his indisputable Salic Law claim - and
that was a claim based on a descent from a ruler who died in *1270*!
If Condé is the heir, he's the heir, unless he does something
monumentally stupid. This is possible, but seems unlikely to me.
OTOH, how long did it take Henri IV to get to the throne? He became
heir in 1584 and nominal king in 1589, but he still had to fight until
1594. So, even if Condé has the law on his side, there might still be
huge obstacles before he can feel the Saint Chrême on his skin.
True, but there were *huge* reasons why large parts of the country
didn't want to accept Henri IV. There are no such reasons with Condé
- just nobles who want to muck about (and the most important of those
was Condé himself, which is problematic)
Post by Jörg
And if he dies in the field?
Then it comes to his son Henri Jules, the Duke d'Enghien. The
Britannica says: "A little man, interested in the arts, the sciences,
and technology, an able courtier and a magnificent host, he was
eccentric, given to malicious practical jokes, and a terror to his wife
and children. In his last years he was mentally quite deranged."
« Fils dénaturé, cruel père, mari terrible, maître détestable,
pernicieux voisin, sans amitié, sans amis, incapable d'en avoir,
jaloux, soupçonneux, inquiet sans aucune relâche, plein de manèges
et d'artifices à découvrir et à scruter tout, à quoi il était
occupé sans cesse. »
Il était atteint de lycanthropie, mal que l'on attribuait à
l'hérédité de sa mère. Saint-Simon explique ainsi : « on disait
tout bas qu'il y avait des temps où tantôt il se croyait chien,
tantôt quelque autre bête, dont il imitait les façons. »
Great. Mad King Henri V (or VI) the Lycanthrope, believing himself to
be a dog or wolf. Wasn´t he the one running around, trying to bite
peasants or servants?
Even if Condé doesn't die in the field, Henri VI (I think Henri is the
most likely name for Gaston to take) will be king for a good twenty odd
years. So much room for fun. Also note that he's a possible match for
Anne if she remains unmarried into the later 1650s - in 1657 she is
thirty and he is 14, I believe. That's a fun match! Great Condé's
son as King of France seems like one of the most awesome AH
possibilities ever. Although Saint-Simon makes everyone sound
fascinating, so perhaps I'm getting too excited.
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
Remember that only a few decades later the French legal experts were
basically saying that Philip V *couldn't* renounce his claim to the
French throne
Especially the current Legitimist ones, I think ...
Well, during the Utrecht negotiations, Torcy (the Foreign Minister) was
basically telling the British and Dutch that he couldn't guarantee a
renunciation, because all of the French legal experts were basically
saying that it wouldn't be lawful, and, iirc, Torcy basically agreed
with this position. Even when the renunciations occurred, the French
were basically caveating that it might not be constitutionally valid.
Philip himself was preparing to cross the Pyrenees and proclaim himself
King when Louis XV got smallpox in 1728/9, and, as far as I understand
it, both Fleury and the Duke of Bourbon felt the claim had justice.

I think that later on, the idea considerably weakened. Certainly I
don't think Louis XVIII and his brother thought that the Spanish
Bourbons would inherit the throne of France if Charles's sons died
without heirs - it was expected the Duke of Orleans would succeed. It
was only revived later on because the Legitimists really really hated
the Orleanses (even more than they had during the Restoration, when it
was sort of a mild, low-lying contempt - Louis Philippe had mostly
escaped his father's opprobrium, I think, since, rather than voting for
Louis XVI's execution, like his father, he'd actually defected with
Dumouriez immediately after it happened. Plus he married a good
Neapolitan Bourbon and was producing stout male heirs. The Spanish
Bourbons were clearly a bunch of slack-jawed idiots that nobody in
their right mind would want on the throne of France (think, if not for
the miracle baby, the next most senior Bourbon after the Dauphin in
1830 would have been Ferdinand VII! And then Don Carlos! On the other
hand, without the miracle baby, you might not get 1830, since Charles
has much less reason to be intransigent, knowing that the Orleans are
going to succeed him and his elder son)

At any rate, in the early 18th century the idea that one couldn't
renounce was still strong. It was strong enough to actually delay a
peace that France really really needed. I think it ought to be strong
enough to allay any lingering doubts about Condé, unless he does
something really really beyond the pale.
Jörg
2006-10-18 21:51:52 UTC
Permalink
[big snips]
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Could Lorraine family kick in if male Bourbons died out?
I believe that Louis XIV would later sign a treaty with the Duke of
Lorraine saying that the Lorraines would get the throne after the
Condés. This was rejected by the Parlements as illegal...
But in this TL, it might help that the second wife of King Gaston was a
Lorraine. Maybe. Hm. In 1659, Charles IV of Lorraine dies. So that
would be his brother Nicolas, or Nicolas' son Charles V Leopold, right?
I have trouble finding out when exactly and how often Charles IV and
Nicolas resigned or swapped the ducal title.
Charles IV did not die until 1675. My understanding is that he came to
the throne in 1624, abdicated in favor of his brother in 1634, then
returned in 1661. It was occupied by the French in 1670, and Charles
went into exile. He died in 1675, and his nephew Charles V succeeded
him as 1675, but in name only. He was supposed to be able to return
after the Peace of Nijmegen, but the French didn't withdraw, and he
stayed in Austria, where he commanded the Austrian part of the army
that relieved Vienna in 1683. He died in 1690, and was succeeded
nominally by his son Leopold Joseph, who was finally restored by the
Peace of Ryswick in 1697. Although the Duchy was again occupied during
the Spanish Succession war, the Duke was allowed to stay.
Ah thank you. I had 1669 for his final exile hand mistakenly saw it as
his date of death.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
BTW, two questions concerning Gaston: How likely is it that his
banishment to Blois has affected his time of death? Will he die the
same time if he is king, or presumably earlier (more stress, even more
indulging) or later (better overall care)?
And - will he reign as King Gaston or as King Jean III? The latter
title, taken from his second name of Jean-Baptiste sounds more regal,
especially as the last one was known as Jean le Bon, apparently.
Jean le Bon had one of the most disastrous reigns in French history -
he was the one captured at Poitiers. Jean was considered a highly
unlikely name, I believe, much as it was in England.
Why this? Only due to misfortune of John Lackland or for a deeper
reason?
Post by j***@gmail.com
On the other hand
"Gaston" is a ridiculous name for a king. I suppose he might take some
entirely new name - the most plausible, I think, would be "Henri," to
remind people of his beloved father.
But was there any precedent for a French king adopting a name that is
not amongst his given names?

[...]
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
I'm not sure who's in a good position if all the Bourbons die out. I'd
say the Lorraines or the Savoys would have the best shot, as
French-speaking dynasties, closely related to the royal house, and of
equal dignity to it (or, at least, as close to equal dignity as one
could get to the House of France) whose own lands were not large enough
to pose a threat to French independence - it would be a case of France
annexing Lorraine or Savoy, not of France being annexed by a foreign
country. Charles Emmanuel of Savoy seems like a good bet in this time
period, since he is a grandson of Henri IV - especially if he's married
to Anne of Montpensier.
It seems that he would have better odds than the Duke of Lorraine; I
think.
Nicolas was not a terribly effectual ruler, I don't think - my
understanding is that he was a defrocked Cardinal who was forced to
marry because the French wanted his brother, who was seen as
anti-French and pro-Spanish, out on the eve of the Franco-Spanish war.
But his line cannot have been too wildly popular, either, since it was
his son Charles V who was denied the return to Nancy.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Note that Charles abdicates just before the war starts, and returns
just after it ends. He might be a plausible "Spanish" candidate in the
event of an Estates General. Also note that, though he's much older
than her (b.1604), he is a potential husband for Anne after his
estranged first wife dies in 1657(his illegally married second wife can
be disposed of without difficulty, I think)
It would be interesting to speculate which "parties" would probably
form and who they would pick as candidates. Culturally there is no way
that France may evolve into an elective monarchy/"republic" like the
Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, I guess?
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Another possibility would be a member of one
Post by j***@gmail.com
of the "foreign dynasties" in France - like the Dukes of Guise or
Nemours, who were cadet members of foreign dynasties, but settled in
France. I think a marriage with one of Gaston's daughters would be the
best way for one of them to get in, though.
Isn`t the ducal line of Nemours (the Savoy cadet branch) already ending
in 1659?
Not sure - there was also a Gonzaga cadet branch in Nevers, maybe?
Technically, they were no longer the cadet branch - the Ducs de Nevers
inherited the Duchy of Mantua in 1627. Apparently that is the reason
why Duke Carlo/Charles III of Mantua (and Monferrato) sold his Duchy of
Nevers and Rethel to Mazarin in OTL 1659. In a TL where it is obvious
that a new dynasty might start, he will probably keep his place in the
French nobilty. And Montferrat is a strategically interesting piece of
territory he would add to France.
Post by j***@gmail.com
I get confused between all of them. Prince Eugene was from a Savoy cadet
branch in, er, Soissons, maybe?
Yes, but a relatively short branch close to the main one - his
grandfather was the first Savoy-Carignan (and Comte de Soissons), and
his great-grandfather still a ruling Duke of Savoy. The relevant
"candidate" would probably be Eugène-Maurice of Savoy-Carignano (the
father of Prince Eugene), who fought for the French during the Battle
of the Dunes and in the latter wars of Louis XIV.

[]
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
OTL that happened in September 52. I agree, something similar seems
plausible during the Second Fronde of TTL as well. But that does not
mean that he doesn´t have a good claim once Gaston dies. If he is
still friendely with the Spaniards, they might decide to back him in a
last gamble to gain the upper hand over France by installing a puppet
king in Paris. Not that that will work as planned, probably.
Well, with Gaston dead and him being the 1st on the line, he could
probably easily change his alliances once more. Providing somebody else
did not manage to squeeze in while he was planning to became French
again. What about Conti?
As I've noted before, I think the Salic Law is pretty engrained in
France by the 1650s. Henri IV was *Protestant* and managed to get the
throne largely on the basis of his indisputable Salic Law claim - and
that was a claim based on a descent from a ruler who died in *1270*!
If Condé is the heir, he's the heir, unless he does something
monumentally stupid. This is possible, but seems unlikely to me.
OTOH, how long did it take Henri IV to get to the throne? He became
heir in 1584 and nominal king in 1589, but he still had to fight until
1594. So, even if Condé has the law on his side, there might still be
huge obstacles before he can feel the Saint Chrême on his skin.
True, but there were *huge* reasons why large parts of the country
didn't want to accept Henri IV. There are no such reasons with Condé
- just nobles who want to muck about (and the most important of those
was Condé himself, which is problematic)
I agree. He will face much less opposition - unless *he* is seen as an
"Asturian candidate" of the Spaniards, depending on the exact timing of
his flight and the Louis' and Philippes death. Then any opponent might
successfully play the national card.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
And if he dies in the field?
Then it comes to his son Henri Jules, the Duke d'Enghien. The
Britannica says: "A little man, interested in the arts, the sciences,
and technology, an able courtier and a magnificent host, he was
eccentric, given to malicious practical jokes, and a terror to his wife
and children. In his last years he was mentally quite deranged."
« Fils dénaturé, cruel père, mari terrible, maître détestable,
pernicieux voisin, sans amitié, sans amis, incapable d'en avoir,
jaloux, soupçonneux, inquiet sans aucune relâche, plein de manèges
et d'artifices à découvrir et à scruter tout, à quoi il était
occupé sans cesse. »
Il était atteint de lycanthropie, mal que l'on attribuait à
l'hérédité de sa mère. Saint-Simon explique ainsi : « on disait
tout bas qu'il y avait des temps où tantôt il se croyait chien,
tantôt quelque autre bête, dont il imitait les façons. »
Great. Mad King Henri V (or VI) the Lycanthrope, believing himself to
be a dog or wolf. Wasn´t he the one running around, trying to bite
peasants or servants?
Even if Condé doesn't die in the field, Henri VI (I think Henri is the
most likely name for Gaston to take) will be king for a good twenty odd
years. So much room for fun. Also note that he's a possible match for
Anne if she remains unmarried into the later 1650s - in 1657 she is
thirty and he is 14, I believe. That's a fun match! Great Condé's
son as King of France seems like one of the most awesome AH
possibilities ever.
Yes.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
Remember that only a few decades later the French legal experts were
basically saying that Philip V *couldn't* renounce his claim to the
French throne
[...]
Post by j***@gmail.com
Philip himself was preparing to cross the Pyrenees and proclaim himself
King when Louis XV got smallpox in 1728/9, and, as far as I understand
it, both Fleury and the Duke of Bourbon felt the claim had justice.
ObWI: LXV dies. War of the French Succession, when Philip tries to
reunite France with Spain and well, everyone else opposes it. That will
probably last long enough to merge with the conflict over the Polish
succession in 1733. The Italian theater will probably start earlier
than OTL.
Post by j***@gmail.com
I think that later on, the idea considerably weakened. Certainly I
don't think Louis XVIII and his brother thought that the Spanish
Bourbons would inherit the throne of France if Charles's sons died
without heirs - it was expected the Duke of Orleans would succeed. It
was only revived later on because the Legitimists really really hated
the Orleanses (even more than they had during the Restoration, when it
was sort of a mild, low-lying contempt - Louis Philippe had mostly
escaped his father's opprobrium, I think, since, rather than voting for
Louis XVI's execution, like his father, he'd actually defected with
Dumouriez immediately after it happened.
ObWI: Have we ever seen here a TL about either a non-guillotined
regicide Louis-Philippe (or his son) becoming King of the French in the
late 1790s, before and/or instead of a Bonaparte coup? A bourgeois
monarchy without divine right of the kings thirty years early and
replacing the First Empire would be very intersting.

Plus he married a good
Post by j***@gmail.com
Neapolitan Bourbon and was producing stout male heirs. The Spanish
Bourbons were clearly a bunch of slack-jawed idiots that nobody in
their right mind would want on the throne of France (think, if not for
the miracle baby, the next most senior Bourbon after the Dauphin in
1830 would have been Ferdinand VII! And then Don Carlos! On the other
hand, without the miracle baby, you might not get 1830, since Charles
has much less reason to be intransigent, knowing that the Orleans are
going to succeed him and his elder son)
ObWI Unless he really hopes for the sucession of a Spanish Bourbon ...
Post by j***@gmail.com
At any rate, in the early 18th century the idea that one couldn't
renounce was still strong. It was strong enough to actually delay a
peace that France really really needed. I think it ought to be strong
enough to allay any lingering doubts about Condé, unless he does
something really really beyond the pale.
What might that be? Would being generally seen as personally
responsible for the death of Louis XIV and Philippe be enough (true or
not)? What else?

(More thoughts about the shape of a Sun King-less France tomorrow.)

Jörg
j***@gmail.com
2006-10-19 02:22:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jörg
[big snips]
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Could Lorraine family kick in if male Bourbons died out?
I believe that Louis XIV would later sign a treaty with the Duke of
Lorraine saying that the Lorraines would get the throne after the
Condés. This was rejected by the Parlements as illegal...
But in this TL, it might help that the second wife of King Gaston was a
Lorraine. Maybe. Hm. In 1659, Charles IV of Lorraine dies. So that
would be his brother Nicolas, or Nicolas' son Charles V Leopold, right?
I have trouble finding out when exactly and how often Charles IV and
Nicolas resigned or swapped the ducal title.
Charles IV did not die until 1675. My understanding is that he came to
the throne in 1624, abdicated in favor of his brother in 1634, then
returned in 1661. It was occupied by the French in 1670, and Charles
went into exile. He died in 1675, and his nephew Charles V succeeded
him as 1675, but in name only. He was supposed to be able to return
after the Peace of Nijmegen, but the French didn't withdraw, and he
stayed in Austria, where he commanded the Austrian part of the army
that relieved Vienna in 1683. He died in 1690, and was succeeded
nominally by his son Leopold Joseph, who was finally restored by the
Peace of Ryswick in 1697. Although the Duchy was again occupied during
the Spanish Succession war, the Duke was allowed to stay.
Ah thank you. I had 1669 for his final exile hand mistakenly saw it as
his date of death.
Indeed.
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
BTW, two questions concerning Gaston: How likely is it that his
banishment to Blois has affected his time of death? Will he die the
same time if he is king, or presumably earlier (more stress, even more
indulging) or later (better overall care)?
And - will he reign as King Gaston or as King Jean III? The latter
title, taken from his second name of Jean-Baptiste sounds more regal,
especially as the last one was known as Jean le Bon, apparently.
Jean le Bon had one of the most disastrous reigns in French history -
he was the one captured at Poitiers. Jean was considered a highly
unlikely name, I believe, much as it was in England.
Why this? Only due to misfortune of John Lackland or for a deeper
reason?
John Lackland mostly, I think.
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
On the other hand
"Gaston" is a ridiculous name for a king. I suppose he might take some
entirely new name - the most plausible, I think, would be "Henri," to
remind people of his beloved father.
But was there any precedent for a French king adopting a name that is
not amongst his given names?
Not that I'm aware of. But when the King is stuck with the given name
"Gaston," I don't see anyone complaining much.
Post by Jörg
[...]
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
I'm not sure who's in a good position if all the Bourbons die out. I'd
say the Lorraines or the Savoys would have the best shot, as
French-speaking dynasties, closely related to the royal house, and of
equal dignity to it (or, at least, as close to equal dignity as one
could get to the House of France) whose own lands were not large enough
to pose a threat to French independence - it would be a case of France
annexing Lorraine or Savoy, not of France being annexed by a foreign
country. Charles Emmanuel of Savoy seems like a good bet in this time
period, since he is a grandson of Henri IV - especially if he's married
to Anne of Montpensier.
It seems that he would have better odds than the Duke of Lorraine; I
think.
Nicolas was not a terribly effectual ruler, I don't think - my
understanding is that he was a defrocked Cardinal who was forced to
marry because the French wanted his brother, who was seen as
anti-French and pro-Spanish, out on the eve of the Franco-Spanish war.
But his line cannot have been too wildly popular, either, since it was
his son Charles V who was denied the return to Nancy.
It was more that Lorraine was strategically important to France, and
they didn't want to give it up, I think. And obviously 1678 is a
different time from the 1630s.
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
Note that Charles abdicates just before the war starts, and returns
just after it ends. He might be a plausible "Spanish" candidate in the
event of an Estates General. Also note that, though he's much older
than her (b.1604), he is a potential husband for Anne after his
estranged first wife dies in 1657(his illegally married second wife can
be disposed of without difficulty, I think)
It would be interesting to speculate which "parties" would probably
form and who they would pick as candidates. Culturally there is no way
that France may evolve into an elective monarchy/"republic" like the
Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, I guess?
I think that once a house was chosen, they'd stick to it. It would
have salic law just like the old dynasty, and would last until it
became extinct. Although there would be the question of whether it was
male heirs of the first new king, or male heirs whatsoever, which could
theoretically lead to problems.
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Another possibility would be a member of one
Post by j***@gmail.com
of the "foreign dynasties" in France - like the Dukes of Guise or
Nemours, who were cadet members of foreign dynasties, but settled in
France. I think a marriage with one of Gaston's daughters would be the
best way for one of them to get in, though.
Isn`t the ducal line of Nemours (the Savoy cadet branch) already ending
in 1659?
Not sure - there was also a Gonzaga cadet branch in Nevers, maybe?
Technically, they were no longer the cadet branch - the Ducs de Nevers
inherited the Duchy of Mantua in 1627. Apparently that is the reason
why Duke Carlo/Charles III of Mantua (and Monferrato) sold his Duchy of
Nevers and Rethel to Mazarin in OTL 1659. In a TL where it is obvious
that a new dynasty might start, he will probably keep his place in the
French nobilty. And Montferrat is a strategically interesting piece of
territory he would add to France.
Yes. Although the House of Gonzague is considerably less prestigious
than the Lorraines or the Savoys.
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
I get confused between all of them. Prince Eugene was from a Savoy cadet
branch in, er, Soissons, maybe?
Yes, but a relatively short branch close to the main one - his
grandfather was the first Savoy-Carignan (and Comte de Soissons), and
his great-grandfather still a ruling Duke of Savoy. The relevant
"candidate" would probably be Eugène-Maurice of Savoy-Carignano (the
father of Prince Eugene), who fought for the French during the Battle
of the Dunes and in the latter wars of Louis XIV.
Hmm...yes. Seems as though the Duke of Savoy himself is a more likely
candidate.
Post by Jörg
[]
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Jörg
OTL that happened in September 52. I agree, something similar seems
plausible during the Second Fronde of TTL as well. But that does not
mean that he doesn´t have a good claim once Gaston dies. If he is
still friendely with the Spaniards, they might decide to back him in a
last gamble to gain the upper hand over France by installing a puppet
king in Paris. Not that that will work as planned, probably.
Well, with Gaston dead and him being the 1st on the line, he could
probably easily change his alliances once more. Providing somebody else
did not manage to squeeze in while he was planning to became French
again. What about Conti?
As I've noted before, I think the Salic Law is pretty engrained in
France by the 1650s. Henri IV was *Protestant* and managed to get the
throne largely on the basis of his indisputable Salic Law claim - and
that was a claim based on a descent from a ruler who died in *1270*!
If Condé is the heir, he's the heir, unless he does something
monumentally stupid. This is possible, but seems unlikely to me.
OTOH, how long did it take Henri IV to get to the throne? He became
heir in 1584 and nominal king in 1589, but he still had to fight until
1594. So, even if Condé has the law on his side, there might still be
huge obstacles before he can feel the Saint Chrême on his skin.
True, but there were *huge* reasons why large parts of the country
didn't want to accept Henri IV. There are no such reasons with Condé
- just nobles who want to muck about (and the most important of those
was Condé himself, which is problematic)
I agree. He will face much less opposition - unless *he* is seen as an
"Asturian candidate" of the Spaniards, depending on the exact timing of
his flight and the Louis' and Philippes death. Then any opponent might
successfully play the national card.
I think it's easy enough for him to beat the rap. He did whup the
Spaniards' ass at Rocroi, and is a genuine military hero. But could
happen, if the timing goes wrong.
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
And if he dies in the field?
Then it comes to his son Henri Jules, the Duke d'Enghien. The
Britannica says: "A little man, interested in the arts, the sciences,
and technology, an able courtier and a magnificent host, he was
eccentric, given to malicious practical jokes, and a terror to his wife
and children. In his last years he was mentally quite deranged."
« Fils dénaturé, cruel père, mari terrible, maître détestable,
pernicieux voisin, sans amitié, sans amis, incapable d'en avoir,
jaloux, soupçonneux, inquiet sans aucune relâche, plein de manèges
et d'artifices à découvrir et à scruter tout, à quoi il était
occupé sans cesse. »
Il était atteint de lycanthropie, mal que l'on attribuait à
l'hérédité de sa mère. Saint-Simon explique ainsi : « on disait
tout bas qu'il y avait des temps où tantôt il se croyait chien,
tantôt quelque autre bête, dont il imitait les façons. »
Great. Mad King Henri V (or VI) the Lycanthrope, believing himself to
be a dog or wolf. Wasn´t he the one running around, trying to bite
peasants or servants?
Even if Condé doesn't die in the field, Henri VI (I think Henri is the
most likely name for Gaston to take) will be king for a good twenty odd
years. So much room for fun. Also note that he's a possible match for
Anne if she remains unmarried into the later 1650s - in 1657 she is
thirty and he is 14, I believe. That's a fun match! Great Condé's
son as King of France seems like one of the most awesome AH
possibilities ever.
Yes.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
Remember that only a few decades later the French legal experts were
basically saying that Philip V *couldn't* renounce his claim to the
French throne
[...]
Post by j***@gmail.com
Philip himself was preparing to cross the Pyrenees and proclaim himself
King when Louis XV got smallpox in 1728/9, and, as far as I understand
it, both Fleury and the Duke of Bourbon felt the claim had justice.
ObWI: LXV dies. War of the French Succession, when Philip tries to
reunite France with Spain and well, everyone else opposes it. That will
probably last long enough to merge with the conflict over the Polish
succession in 1733. The Italian theater will probably start earlier
than OTL.
I actually started a TL on that subject. One issue is that the
alternate candidate, Louis of Orleans, does not seem to be terribly
ambitious, and key figures in the army and administration, as well as
the Duke of Bourbon, the other main prince of the blood, seem to
support Philip. Orleans's position in France looks very weak. Also
worth noting that in 1728/1729 Austria and Spain are actually getting
along well, and are involved in a kind of bloodless pseudo-war against
France, England, and Holland. The only way Philip is going to take the
French throne, though, is if he immediately abdicates in spain and
makes Don Carlos King. That way the Prince of Asturias becomes the
Dauphin, and the crowns aren't united. I *think* he would be smart
enough to do this. Certainly Isabella, who's really running the show,
will be happy to see her son installed as King of Spain. A treaty
could be negotiated whereby Spain becomes a secundigeniture of France.
Alternately, the whole Spanish Bourbon family could move up to France,
and the Orleans could be transplanted to Spain.

This only works if Philip's supporters in Paris act quickly, and Louis
of Orleans does not. This seems actually more likely than the
alternative, because Philip was ready to act, he had many supporters in
Paris, and nobody much likes Orleans, who is a political nonentity.
The key pro-Orleans figure is, I think, going to be Horatio Walpole,
the British ambassador and brother to Sir Robert. He's going to
exercise himself strongly on behalf of the Duke of Orleans.

But the hated Regent's not particularly liked son + the British
ambassador seems to me a rather weak reed to pin our hopes on. I think
Philip succeeds without much trouble, so long as he doesn't want to
have his cake and eat it too.
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
I think that later on, the idea considerably weakened. Certainly I
don't think Louis XVIII and his brother thought that the Spanish
Bourbons would inherit the throne of France if Charles's sons died
without heirs - it was expected the Duke of Orleans would succeed. It
was only revived later on because the Legitimists really really hated
the Orleanses (even more than they had during the Restoration, when it
was sort of a mild, low-lying contempt - Louis Philippe had mostly
escaped his father's opprobrium, I think, since, rather than voting for
Louis XVI's execution, like his father, he'd actually defected with
Dumouriez immediately after it happened.
ObWI: Have we ever seen here a TL about either a non-guillotined
regicide Louis-Philippe (or his son) becoming King of the French in the
late 1790s, before and/or instead of a Bonaparte coup? A bourgeois
monarchy without divine right of the kings thirty years early and
replacing the First Empire would be very intersting.
I think the only chance for the Orleans is actually earlier. A
successful flight to Varennes might lead to Philippe Egalité being
elected king by the Legislative Assembly - he'd be the most senior
(only?) member of the royal family left in the country. Whether he's
able to hold onto it is another question.
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
At any rate, in the early 18th century the idea that one couldn't
renounce was still strong. It was strong enough to actually delay a
peace that France really really needed. I think it ought to be strong
enough to allay any lingering doubts about Condé, unless he does
something really really beyond the pale.
What might that be? Would being generally seen as personally
responsible for the death of Louis XIV and Philippe be enough (true or
not)? What else?
Yeah, if he was seen as personally responsible for Louis XIV's death
that might do it. I'm not really sure, though.
Jörg
2006-10-21 15:27:39 UTC
Permalink
[big snips]
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
On the other hand
"Gaston" is a ridiculous name for a king. I suppose he might take some
entirely new name - the most plausible, I think, would be "Henri," to
remind people of his beloved father.
But was there any precedent for a French king adopting a name that is
not amongst his given names?
Not that I'm aware of. But when the King is stuck with the given name
"Gaston," I don't see anyone complaining much.
I am not sure I can see why "Gaston" is supposed to be that ridiculous.
AFAI can find out, it is the gallicised form of Dutch/Flemish Waast
(same way as Willem/Guillaume or Wouter/Gauthier), who originally was
Saint Vedastus, the teacher of King Clovis c.500. No great celebrity,
but a regular saint with a few popularity booms (supposedly related to
miracles around Arras).
Well, today it´s different, as one might think primarily of the
Belgian "Gaston lagaffe" stripps with their fumb ling hero, but in
1650?
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
[...]
Post by j***@gmail.com
Nicolas was not a terribly effectual ruler, I don't think - my
understanding is that he was a defrocked Cardinal who was forced to
marry because the French wanted his brother, who was seen as
anti-French and pro-Spanish, out on the eve of the Franco-Spanish war.
But his line cannot have been too wildly popular, either, since it was
his son Charles V who was denied the return to Nancy.
It was more that Lorraine was strategically important to France, and
they didn't want to give it up, I think. And obviously 1678 is a
different time from the 1630s.
Agree.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
Note that Charles abdicates just before the war starts, and returns
just after it ends. He might be a plausible "Spanish" candidate in the
event of an Estates General. Also note that, though he's much older
than her (b.1604), he is a potential husband for Anne after his
estranged first wife dies in 1657(his illegally married second wife can
be disposed of without difficulty, I think)
It would be interesting to speculate which "parties" would probably
form and who they would pick as candidates. Culturally there is no way
that France may evolve into an elective monarchy/"republic" like the
Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, I guess?
I think that once a house was chosen, they'd stick to it. It would
have salic law just like the old dynasty, and would last until it
became extinct. Although there would be the question of whether it was
male heirs of the first new king, or male heirs whatsoever, which could
theoretically lead to problems.
There might be a distant possibility that the Estates-General would
choose a sonless candidate, just in order to have a second election
some years later. The fear of a renewed civil war might be actually
less than the greedy hope for more bribes by candidates and their
foreign supporters. It is interesting, that Spain never had problems
finding defectors in France. I cannot think of many (any?) traitorous
Spaniards going over to the French (when we accept that the Low
Countries, Portugal and Catalonia are dfferent situations).

[...]
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
the Ducs de Nevers
inherited the Duchy of Mantua in 1627. Apparently that is the reason
why Duke Carlo/Charles III of Mantua (and Monferrato) sold his Duchy of
Nevers and Rethel to Mazarin in OTL 1659. In a TL where it is obvious
that a new dynasty might start, he will probably keep his place in the
French nobilty. And Montferrat is a strategically interesting piece of
territory he would add to France.
Yes. Although the House of Gonzague is considerably less prestigious
than the Lorraines or the Savoys.
Agreed.

[...]
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by j***@gmail.com
At any rate, in the early 18th century the idea that one couldn't
renounce was still strong. It was strong enough to actually delay a
peace that France really really needed. I think it ought to be strong
enough to allay any lingering doubts about Condé, unless he does
something really really beyond the pale.
What might that be? Would being generally seen as personally
responsible for the death of Louis XIV and Philippe be enough (true or
not)? What else?
Yeah, if he was seen as personally responsible for Louis XIV's death
that might do it. I'm not really sure, though.
There were many opportunities during the second Fronce to kill Louis -
like the cannonballs La Grande Mademoiselle fired against the royal
camp near the Faubourg St.Antoine on 2. July 1652.I guess if she were
to kill the king, Anne would even boast of it later, creating a certain
embarrassment for her father, the (pobable) new king.

The new king only, I think, if Philippe dies as well. I was unable to
find out where Philippe was kept by his mother during the Fronde years
- perhaps in a boarding school for young ladies, given how she treated
him generally.

Of course, the history of the kingship of Philippe VII from age 11 on
would be very interesting as well, but I think not as different from
OTL as anything following the death of both brothers.

[ObRant: I just reread parts of Erlanger's bio of Louis XIV in a rather
bad German translation. Not only that the ranslater obviously cannot
tell the "brotherly princes of Bourbon" (ie Louis II and Armand) apart
from the brothers Louis and Philippe, there are some passage impossible
to explain unless the translator saw the names of Condé, Conti and
Gondi as synomous.]

Some ideas for the future of this France:

Assuming Gaston becomes king, I guess he will give quite some influence
to the members of the First and Second Fronde, even if Condé has
defected.

Gondi/Retz will be probably rather influential due to his command of
the Parisian opinion (especially if he manages to become the archbishop
of Paris after his greatuncle and predecessor dies in 1654.) He seems
to have flirted with a republicanism and, of course, the Parlement (not
that they have much in common with each other) and if there is an
estates-General, the first after 1614, I see him as very influential
here.

Actually, Gaston *might* be coerced/talked by the Frondeurs into
calling the EG anyway. IMO this is one point where France might have
started a development towards a constitutional monarchy; especially if
the reforms of the Chambre Saint-Louis with their proto-Bill of Rights
are upheld. Of curse, that *would* mean a much weaker central
government, and a poorer one, as well, with the intendants gone.

That again might mean a worse ability to stay in the war against Spain.
Given that the territorial cessions by Spain in OTL were comparably
small when contrasted to some French hopes (all of the Low Countries,
Burgundy, Catalonia), that means probably a peace settlement keeping
the status quo ante. Maria Teresa is 12 years older than the new
Dauphin Jean Gaston (even if he survives) so I think a marriage would
be rather odd. They might even fear she might be too old for having
healthy sons when the husband is old enough to sire them.

Condé might be willing to curb his ambition and arrogance if there is
an adult king, but these tendencies seem to have been extremely strong.
I can easily see him defecting over a matter of purely symbolic
importance - like an royal refusal to resurrect the Great Office of
Connétable and award it to him for his loyalty. If Condé is fighting
good enough for Spain to secure a peace without territorial losses
might be able to claim the ducal title and territory of Luxembourg as
payment and spend his time waiting in the Ardennes for the days that
the young Dauphin dies and he becomes heir presumptive again.

If there is a King Louis XV (Condé), he might have the Sun King's
absolutistic ambition, but none of his personal and diplomatic skills.
Especially if there is a strong parlement (or even EGs), I see much
trouble.

Anopther thing to think of: The treatment of the huguenots. Is there
any realistic possibility of an earlier Edict of Fountainbleau (perhaps
after Gaston's death in c.1660) when they have enough strength left to
rebel and the still protestant Turenne leading them?

Jörg
L***@gmail.com
2006-10-17 00:36:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
What now? Gaston will be king, but probably very weak, and men like
Condé, Conti, Turenne, the Duc de Bouillon, even the Cardinal de Retz,
will compete for power - and that will also mean the marriage with
Anne, the Duchess of Montpensier.
Oh! Fun! Can she play the part of Margaret of Anjou in this particular
brand of the War of the Roses? Louis hated her living guts, but she
seems to have the begininngs of a reasonably talented person, unlike
her husband.
Well, her first request for royal permission to marry her OTL husband
came in 1670, apparently. So I think we are safe to assume that this
relationship will be butterflied away.
Yeah; from your original post, I misconstrued you to mean Anne marrying
Gaston, due to some rather unfortunate kind of brainfart.

She does seem like a canny sort of Princess Royale.
Post by Jörg
Wikipedia says that she even
thought of marrying the Prince of Wales (Charles II). Between 1652 and
1662, that might be at least possible. But probably too much fun, even
if Salic Law bars Charles (if he is *restored) from claiming the throne
of France more directly than he did anyway by being King of England.
Quite. I think, in her position, she's strongly resist being married to
a future sovereign of a foreign state or a French noble. So, we're
looking at second or third brothers of mid-level kingdoms, preferably
Catholic.

Offhand, I can't think of anyone, and googling isn't helping too much.

Maximilian might have some kids; the House of Savoy will spit before
marrying France. Some middling French nobleman who's totally stinking
stupid mght be useful.

Could she break down Salic Law? Not that Dad's the sharpest knife in
the drawer, but a cabal of smarter nobles plus Queen Anne might be able
to convince France that in order to survive the assault launched by ___
they need to band together around the young child, Louis Gaston, blah
blah.
Post by Jörg
Hm, strange butterfly: The Brits don't gain Bombay as dowry from
Portugal.
Mahmm. I dunno; Charles II might still get the Portugese wife, at least
temporarily. Or, perhaps, be harbored their via the House of Savoy, and
thus marry her all the same.
Post by Jörg
See above. A strong Reine Anne would be very inetresting, but I guess
many very powerful nobles and princes of the royal blood would try to
marry her - by a French version of rough wooing, if necessary.
Given her OTL performance, she might survive on her own two badass
feet. But getting her to dodge through the marriage market is going to
be harder. Are there any male Bourbon cousins outside of France she can
marry that flow from a male-descent line?
Post by Jörg
I am afraid that even the legitimized childern won't count much unless
they head a real superior army. Probably some Bourbon branch beyond
Henri's lines will claim the top spot.
Maybe; OTOH, marrying Anne to that middling Duc could get us a
legitimist heir that can be a sort-of compromise candidate to bypass
Salic Law.
Post by Jörg
"Upon the accession to France's throne of Henry IV de Bourbon in 1589,
his first cousin-once-removed Henry, Prince of Condé (1588-1646),
was heir presumptive to the crown until 1601. [...] from 1589 to 1709
the Princes of Condé coincidentally held the rank at court of Premier
Prince du Sang Royal (First Prince of the Blood Royal), [...]"
So we can probably assume that Louis II Duc de Bourbon, "the Great
Condé" (as the then ruling eldest son of the Prince Henry mentioned
above) will claim to be the king once Gaston dies sonless. I can't say
whether his OTL death in 1660 will happen another time in this TL.
Probably.
Wiki says "The Great Conde" died in 1686.
Post by Jörg
One nice prerequisite for trouble: Condé cannot marry Anne to solidify
his claim, since he is married since he is married since 1641, to a
niece of Richelieu. She has born him a son in 1443, who is 16 years
younger than Anne, so marrying them to each other seems out, as well.
And meanwhile, Conde and Anne were apparently going at it OTL daggers
drawn during and after the Fronde. In the ATL, I see no reason for this
to be substantially better; if he is in fact heir, it may be rather
worse. She may end up conspiring against him, and he against her.

He may still well be in exile in Spain during this era, though he may
return with greater haste, given his frusteration there and his higher
rank as heir to the throne. He may still end up at the Battle of the
Dunes, however, and the Peace of the Pyrenees is still a decade-ish
after your PoD.
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
Oh, I think William of Orange would make off with that, or at least,
some of it.
Sounds likely, *if* he ever comes to power (he will exist, being born
in November 1650). With Louis XIV dead, there will not even be vaguely
the events that led France to attack the Dutch in 1672. So De Witt
might stay in power until his resigantion or natural death, whereas
Willem van Oranje, het kind van state, may lead a quiet private life
with a lover of his choice.
Depends; I can't see Conde, made king, being a non-threat to the
Netherlands.
Post by Jörg
(Mary "II" won't be born in this TL, and
the Orange-Stuart marriage is highly contingent of the Anglo-Dutch
relations.)
Hmm. Maybe; I'm less certain than you. But the whole fun intercetion of
Stuarts and Europe needs to be definatively sorted out for other things
to be effectively asserted as true or false here.
Post by Jörg
So I would say the chances of WIII ever becoming Stadtholder in a TL
with a seriously less offensively capable France are much worse than in
OTL. I cannot claim that their would *never* be a successful ousting of
the Statists by the Orangists (perhaps when De Witt dies/steps down),
but that would really would be a secondary PoD.
Or a side effect of the Conde-Anne fight that breaks out whenever it
does, or something. It's sort of a contingent tangle.
Post by Jörg
Spain? Portugal? Perhaps even Italy? OTOH, the fate of Chrales II is
highly chance-driven. Hm, Worcester is in 1651. After his flight from
England, CII might not even return to France if there is serious
trouble brewing. He might go (almost) directly to The Hague (or to
Breda) and take his mother with him. Or not. Henrietta and James staying
in France, the latter fighting in the wars among the nobles has a
certain charme, too.
Agreed; Charles II grows up under the protection of his sister, while
Mommy, Henrietta, and James fight it out in France, siding with Anne
against Conde...or trying to marry James and Henrietta to Anne and
Conde...
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
I think the Princess of Orange might be able to do something for her
brother, if not her Papist mother, alliances to the English republic
aside. Monck is still around, and one thing should lead to another,
more or less.
The Princess was rather unpopular in the Netherlands, AFAIK.
Ah, well. Her reputation might sustain her brother's arrival, if not
that of her Papist mother.
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
The Dutch Golden Age is not yet over, but they are much too weak
militarily.
Quite; but they're still stronger than Spain in this era, mas o menos.
Which means a larger Dutch Republic, including OTL's Belgium...
Not under De Witt, I think. Catholic peasants and rivalling Flemish
merchants - what are they good for? But the Dutch might take additional
Spanish colonial possessions and keep others like New Amsterdam.
Interesting; say on, good sir, say on.

And I agree re Belgium, at least in part, as it might serve as a useful
buffer against expanding French whatever.
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
William III spends his young life in the field against a weak and
divided France, only to be made King of England. Hmm. Due to
butterflies, the Protestand Union becomes the 800 pound gorilla in
Western Europe.
This can't be good
It is also highly unlikely, I think.
I suppose; but it'd give us a Northern European counterpart to the
Hapsburgs, which would be interesting in a Franceless scenario...
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Brandenburg is still in its infancy.
Verily, but rising fast. I can't see what would stop it from continuing
to grow through this era. Though without Louis XIV, we don't get the
War of Spanish Succession, but Queen Anne might find her own way to
knit France together, as Regent for her adorable sons and her
weak-willed husband, who's mind is "too delicate for this world"
Might happen. It would be interesting just to see who the husband might
be ...
John Kenney, pick up the White Courtesy Phone...
Post by Jörg
Time is an important factor, I think. Anne is just 24 in 1651, and for
some years her father Gaston weill hold the title of king. If he is as
ineffectual as OTL, she might not inherit much to work with, or be sold
by her father to the highest bidder. Plus, Condé will definitely deny
that she has any right to inherit the title at all.
A fair point to mull on; but she might be able to outmanoever Daddy,
given her OTL Fronde performance v. his. Is she cold and canny enough
for it?
Post by Jörg
I very much suspect that Gaston will make concessions to the mighty
nobles (and other parties) that will undo most of the works of
Richelieu and Mazarin.
Probably, yeah. If she, or she and Conde can pick up the peices,
somehow, though

Cheers

L
j***@gmail.com
2006-10-17 01:16:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
What now? Gaston will be king, but probably very weak, and men like
Condé, Conti, Turenne, the Duc de Bouillon, even the Cardinal de Retz,
will compete for power - and that will also mean the marriage with
Anne, the Duchess of Montpensier.
Oh! Fun! Can she play the part of Margaret of Anjou in this particular
brand of the War of the Roses? Louis hated her living guts, but she
seems to have the begininngs of a reasonably talented person, unlike
her husband.
Well, her first request for royal permission to marry her OTL husband
came in 1670, apparently. So I think we are safe to assume that this
relationship will be butterflied away.
Yeah; from your original post, I misconstrued you to mean Anne marrying
Gaston, due to some rather unfortunate kind of brainfart.
That would be rather gross, what with him being her father, and all.
Post by L***@gmail.com
She does seem like a canny sort of Princess Royale.
Post by Jörg
Wikipedia says that she even
thought of marrying the Prince of Wales (Charles II). Between 1652 and
1662, that might be at least possible. But probably too much fun, even
if Salic Law bars Charles (if he is *restored) from claiming the throne
of France more directly than he did anyway by being King of England.
Quite. I think, in her position, she's strongly resist being married to
a future sovereign of a foreign state or a French noble. So, we're
looking at second or third brothers of mid-level kingdoms, preferably
Catholic.
Charles was apparently not very attracted to her...as I recall, he
might have married her anyway, but he was too risky a proposition in
the 1650s. By 1660, she was getting on in years (already 33). In this
situation, as the daughter of the King, she'll be even more important
in the 1650s than OTL. But after 1660 she becomes less important when
Condé presumably becomes king.
Post by L***@gmail.com
Offhand, I can't think of anyone, and googling isn't helping too much.
Maximilian might have some kids; the House of Savoy will spit before
marrying France. Some middling French nobleman who's totally stinking
stupid mght be useful.
Maximilian? The House of Savoy married France a lot. Louis XIII's
sister married into the House of Savoy. Monsieur's second daughter
also married into the House of Savoy (it is through that marriage that
the current Jacobite claim descends). Both of Monseigneur's sons
married Savoy princesses. Louis XVI's brothers both married Savoy
princesses, and his sister married a Savoy prince. Savoy/Bourbon was
one of the most common matings in the period under discussion, I think.
Post by L***@gmail.com
Could she break down Salic Law? Not that Dad's the sharpest knife in
the drawer, but a cabal of smarter nobles plus Queen Anne might be able
to convince France that in order to survive the assault launched by ___
they need to band together around the young child, Louis Gaston, blah
blah.
That seems completely crazy when the alternate heir is, er, France's
greatest military hero. (or, possibly *second* greatest military hero.
Nonetheless, highly unlikely while Condé is available). Even if no
Condé, I think the last phase of the wars of religion proves that the
Salic Law was really strong in France. People really felt like this
was the only proper order of succession.
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Hm, strange butterfly: The Brits don't gain Bombay as dowry from
Portugal.
Mahmm. I dunno; Charles II might still get the Portugese wife, at least
temporarily. Or, perhaps, be harbored their via the House of Savoy, and
thus marry her all the same.
? Is there a word missing here.
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
See above. A strong Reine Anne would be very inetresting, but I guess
many very powerful nobles and princes of the royal blood would try to
marry her - by a French version of rough wooing, if necessary.
Given her OTL performance, she might survive on her own two badass
feet. But getting her to dodge through the marriage market is going to
be harder. Are there any male Bourbon cousins outside of France she can
marry that flow from a male-descent line?
Post by Jörg
I am afraid that even the legitimized childern won't count much unless
they head a real superior army. Probably some Bourbon branch beyond
Henri's lines will claim the top spot.
Maybe; OTOH, marrying Anne to that middling Duc could get us a
legitimist heir that can be a sort-of compromise candidate to bypass
Salic Law.
Post by Jörg
"Upon the accession to France's throne of Henry IV de Bourbon in 1589,
his first cousin-once-removed Henry, Prince of Condé (1588-1646),
was heir presumptive to the crown until 1601. [...] from 1589 to 1709
the Princes of Condé coincidentally held the rank at court of Premier
Prince du Sang Royal (First Prince of the Blood Royal), [...]"
So we can probably assume that Louis II Duc de Bourbon, "the Great
Condé" (as the then ruling eldest son of the Prince Henry mentioned
above) will claim to be the king once Gaston dies sonless. I can't say
whether his OTL death in 1660 will happen another time in this TL.
Probably.
Wiki says "The Great Conde" died in 1686.
I believe that it is Gaston's OTL 1660 death that is being referred to.

I will, however, note another possibility - Gaston in OTL married a
second time, to a princess of lorraine. They had children, several.
The second youngest was a son, Jean Gaston, born in 1650. He died in
infancy in 1652, but butterflies might allow him to survive. Their
last child was born in 1652. It was a daughter, but she survived to
adulthood. So it's possible that Gaston will have a son to succeed
him, either by making Jean Gaston live, or by making that youngest
child a son. That, it seems to me, works better for a "weak France"
model than Condé becoming king - you get 8 years of weak child king
Louis XIV, than 9 years of weak adult king Gaston, then at least
another 10 years or so of a child king.
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
One nice prerequisite for trouble: Condé cannot marry Anne to solidify
his claim, since he is married since he is married since 1641, to a
niece of Richelieu. She has born him a son in 1443, who is 16 years
younger than Anne, so marrying them to each other seems out, as well.
Condé's younger brother Conti is, however, available. I'm not sure if
Condé would want to make that match, though.
Post by L***@gmail.com
And meanwhile, Conde and Anne were apparently going at it OTL daggers
drawn during and after the Fronde. In the ATL, I see no reason for this
to be substantially better; if he is in fact heir, it may be rather
worse. She may end up conspiring against him, and he against her.
He may still well be in exile in Spain during this era, though he may
return with greater haste, given his frusteration there and his higher
rank as heir to the throne. He may still end up at the Battle of the
Dunes, however, and the Peace of the Pyrenees is still a decade-ish
after your PoD.
I don't believe Condé went into exile until after the proposed POD.
So it's possible he'll never go into exile. it'll depend on how he
gets along with the new king, I should imagine, and also on whether or
not he's the heir-presumptive.
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
Oh, I think William of Orange would make off with that, or at least,
some of it.
Sounds likely, *if* he ever comes to power (he will exist, being born
in November 1650). With Louis XIV dead, there will not even be vaguely
the events that led France to attack the Dutch in 1672. So De Witt
might stay in power until his resigantion or natural death, whereas
Willem van Oranje, het kind van state, may lead a quiet private life
with a lover of his choice.
Depends; I can't see Conde, made king, being a non-threat to the
Netherlands.
Well, he's a threat to the *Spanish* Netherlands, and this will incur
Dutch opposition. But I've always felt that the 1672 "crush the Dutch"
campaign had some weird psychological causes on Louis XIV's part.
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
(Mary "II" won't be born in this TL, and
the Orange-Stuart marriage is highly contingent of the Anglo-Dutch
relations.)
Hmm. Maybe; I'm less certain than you. But the whole fun intercetion of
Stuarts and Europe needs to be definatively sorted out for other things
to be effectively asserted as true or false here.
Yes.
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Spain? Portugal? Perhaps even Italy? OTOH, the fate of Chrales II is
highly chance-driven. Hm, Worcester is in 1651. After his flight from
England, CII might not even return to France if there is serious
trouble brewing. He might go (almost) directly to The Hague (or to
Breda) and take his mother with him. Or not. Henrietta and James staying
in France, the latter fighting in the wars among the nobles has a
certain charme, too.
Agreed; Charles II grows up under the protection of his sister, while
Mommy, Henrietta, and James fight it out in France, siding with Anne
against Conde...or trying to marry James and Henrietta to Anne and
Conde...
Charles II was already rather grown up in 1651 - he was 21 years old,
and, er, older than his sister. I do wonder if Gaston is going to be
quite the cipher that you guys all anticipate him being. Even if
Mazarin is gone (as is likely), Gaston will have the bureaucracy that
Richelieu and Mazarin built to work with, and there are presumably some
effective civil servants who will be loyally serving the crown. I
think Gaston's brother's reign demonstrates that you don't need a
competent king to have a competent reign. Obviously the situation will
be difficult, especially if the king can't control his crazy daughter,
but I think he has advantages that you have not considered. Above all,
he is an adult king. There is no more regency, and no more child king,
and no more hated favorite, and no more hated foreign regent. It's one
thing to rise up against a foreign regent and her foreign
favorite/lover. It's quite another to rise up against the lawful,
adult king. Even if Gaston is a dunce, he'll have the full power of
the state behind him, and that's not nothing.
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
I think the Princess of Orange might be able to do something for her
brother, if not her Papist mother, alliances to the English republic
aside. Monck is still around, and one thing should lead to another,
more or less.
The Princess was rather unpopular in the Netherlands, AFAIK.
Ah, well. Her reputation might sustain her brother's arrival, if not
that of her Papist mother.
I believe that Mary was mostly living in Breda, an enclave in the south
of the United Provinces which were personal property of the Oranges.
This should be fairly safe, whatever the political situation over in
Holland.
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
The Dutch Golden Age is not yet over, but they are much too weak
militarily.
Quite; but they're still stronger than Spain in this era, mas o menos.
Which means a larger Dutch Republic, including OTL's Belgium...
Not under De Witt, I think. Catholic peasants and rivalling Flemish
merchants - what are they good for? But the Dutch might take additional
Spanish colonial possessions and keep others like New Amsterdam.
Interesting; say on, good sir, say on.
The Dutch have just ended their war with Spain. Why start it again
when Spain looks basically helpless? The existence of the Spanish
Netherlands is the best protection against France, at any rate.
Post by L***@gmail.com
And I agree re Belgium, at least in part, as it might serve as a useful
buffer against expanding French whatever.
But there will be much less expanding France. The regents, at any
rate, want peace, and are not going to attack poor helpless Spain. If
the Oranges come back, all bets are off, though.
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
William III spends his young life in the field against a weak and
divided France, only to be made King of England. Hmm. Due to
butterflies, the Protestand Union becomes the 800 pound gorilla in
Western Europe.
This can't be good
It is also highly unlikely, I think.
I suppose; but it'd give us a Northern European counterpart to the
Hapsburgs, which would be interesting in a Franceless scenario...
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Brandenburg is still in its infancy.
Verily, but rising fast. I can't see what would stop it from continuing
to grow through this era. Though without Louis XIV, we don't get the
War of Spanish Succession, but Queen Anne might find her own way to
knit France together, as Regent for her adorable sons and her
weak-willed husband, who's mind is "too delicate for this world"
Might happen. It would be interesting just to see who the husband might
be ...
John Kenney, pick up the White Courtesy Phone...
Er. There's any number of possibilities. If Condé is dominant, it's
likely she'll be married off to a foreigner. Charles Emmanuel II of
Savoy (7 years younger than her) seems a possibility. Gaston has
connections to the Lorraines, but I don't think there's any Lorraines
of the right age. Ferdinand Maria of Bavaria is 9 years younger.
Emperor Ferdinand III's eldest son (the early dying Ferdinand IV) is 6
years younger. There's no Spanish candidates - Philip IV's son by his
first marriage has already died, and he's already remarried by the time
of the POD. That about exhausts the main Catholic families, besides
the Bourbons themselves (in that case, Armand of Conti, Condé's
brother, seems the only plausible option, and is rather unlikely).
There's also minor Italian dynasties (Este, Gonzaga, Farnese, Medici),
but that seems as though it would be considered low for the eldest
daughter of the Most Christian King. If she's married off to a
foreigner, she's out of the running in France. I think, all things
considered, the Savoy marriage seems most likely.
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Time is an important factor, I think. Anne is just 24 in 1651, and for
some years her father Gaston weill hold the title of king. If he is as
ineffectual as OTL, she might not inherit much to work with, or be sold
by her father to the highest bidder. Plus, Condé will definitely deny
that she has any right to inherit the title at all.
A fair point to mull on; but she might be able to outmanoever Daddy,
given her OTL Fronde performance v. his. Is she cold and canny enough
for it?
She doesn't have any right to inherit the title at all, if the title
we're referring to is "Queen of France." It's not going to happen.
The Salic Law is settled - the Guises couldn't overturn it in the
1590s, and Anne of Montpensier won't be able to overturn it in the
1650s, especially when her opponent is as formidable as Condé. Note
that the Parlements will be entirely against her, as well, which is not
a good place to be. Her father is unlikely to be particularly
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
I very much suspect that Gaston will make concessions to the mighty
nobles (and other parties) that will undo most of the works of
Richelieu and Mazarin.
Probably, yeah. If she, or she and Conde can pick up the peices,
somehow, though
As I said above, I'm not so sure. Gaston's positions as
heir-presumptive and royal uncle are not necessarily his positions as
king. He's a weak man, and once he becomes king he'll be surrounded by
the people who worked for his brother and nephew. It's these types who
will dominate the administration, and they won't be inclined to destroy
their own power. For a comparable example, note that the
administrators who worked for Catherine de Medici continued under Henry
IV, and all the way through to the early years of Louis XIII.
Jörg
2006-10-17 13:56:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
What now? Gaston will be king, but probably very weak, and men like
Condé, Conti, Turenne, the Duc de Bouillon, even the Cardinal de Retz,
will compete for power - and that will also mean the marriage with
Anne, the Duchess of Montpensier.
Oh! Fun! Can she play the part of Margaret of Anjou in this particular
brand of the War of the Roses? Louis hated her living guts, but she
seems to have the begininngs of a reasonably talented person, unlike
her husband.
Well, her first request for royal permission to marry her OTL husband
came in 1670, apparently. So I think we are safe to assume that this
relationship will be butterflied away.
Yeah; from your original post, I misconstrued you to mean Anne marrying
Gaston, due to some rather unfortunate kind of brainfart.
That would be rather gross, what with him being her father, and all.
Post by L***@gmail.com
She does seem like a canny sort of Princess Royale.
Post by Jörg
Wikipedia says that she even
thought of marrying the Prince of Wales (Charles II). Between 1652 and
1662, that might be at least possible. But probably too much fun, even
if Salic Law bars Charles (if he is *restored) from claiming the throne
of France more directly than he did anyway by being King of England.
Quite. I think, in her position, she's strongly resist being married to
a future sovereign of a foreign state or a French noble. So, we're
looking at second or third brothers of mid-level kingdoms, preferably
Catholic.
Charles was apparently not very attracted to her...as I recall, he
might have married her anyway, but he was too risky a proposition in
the 1650s. By 1660, she was getting on in years (already 33). In this
situation, as the daughter of the King, she'll be even more important
in the 1650s than OTL. But after 1660 she becomes less important when
Condé presumably becomes king.
But there is still her immense personal wealth. This, combined with her
position of Fille de France, makes her still an influential factor; I
think.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by L***@gmail.com
Offhand, I can't think of anyone, and googling isn't helping too much.
Maximilian might have some kids; the House of Savoy will spit before
marrying France. Some middling French nobleman who's totally stinking
stupid mght be useful.
Maximilian? The House of Savoy married France a lot. Louis XIII's
sister married into the House of Savoy. Monsieur's second daughter
also married into the House of Savoy (it is through that marriage that
the current Jacobite claim descends). Both of Monseigneur's sons
married Savoy princesses. Louis XVI's brothers both married Savoy
princesses, and his sister married a Savoy prince. Savoy/Bourbon was
one of the most common matings in the period under discussion, I think.
Post by L***@gmail.com
Could she break down Salic Law? Not that Dad's the sharpest knife in
the drawer, but a cabal of smarter nobles plus Queen Anne might be able
to convince France that in order to survive the assault launched by ___
they need to band together around the young child, Louis Gaston, blah
blah.
That seems completely crazy when the alternate heir is, er, France's
greatest military hero. (or, possibly *second* greatest military hero.
Nonetheless, highly unlikely while Condé is available). Even if no
Condé, I think the last phase of the wars of religion proves that the
Salic Law was really strong in France. People really felt like this
was the only proper order of succession.
I think the SL will win out, ultimately, but there is the distinct
possibility of someone favoring Anne still challenging it, leading to
more trouble (politically, diplomatically if she has married abroad,
perhaps also militarily) once Gaston dies. Especially if there is no
son from the second marriage.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Hm, strange butterfly: The Brits don't gain Bombay as dowry from
Portugal.
Mahmm. I dunno; Charles II might still get the Portugese wife, at least
temporarily. Or, perhaps, be harbored their via the House of Savoy, and
thus marry her all the same.
? Is there a word missing here.
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
See above. A strong Reine Anne would be very inetresting, but I guess
many very powerful nobles and princes of the royal blood would try to
marry her - by a French version of rough wooing, if necessary.
Given her OTL performance, she might survive on her own two badass
feet. But getting her to dodge through the marriage market is going to
be harder. Are there any male Bourbon cousins outside of France she can
marry that flow from a male-descent line?
Outside, I don´t know. Perhaps we should widen it it to "Capetian".
Inside France, there is Conti available, as you noted yourself.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
I am afraid that even the legitimized childern won't count much unless
they head a real superior army. Probably some Bourbon branch beyond
Henri's lines will claim the top spot.
Maybe; OTOH, marrying Anne to that middling Duc could get us a
legitimist heir that can be a sort-of compromise candidate to bypass
Salic Law.
Post by Jörg
"Upon the accession to France's throne of Henry IV de Bourbon in 1589,
his first cousin-once-removed Henry, Prince of Condé (1588-1646),
was heir presumptive to the crown until 1601. [...] from 1589 to 1709
the Princes of Condé coincidentally held the rank at court of Premier
Prince du Sang Royal (First Prince of the Blood Royal), [...]"
So we can probably assume that Louis II Duc de Bourbon, "the Great
Condé" (as the then ruling eldest son of the Prince Henry mentioned
above) will claim to be the king once Gaston dies sonless. I can't say
whether his OTL death in 1660 will happen another time in this TL.
Probably.
Wiki says "The Great Conde" died in 1686.
I believe that it is Gaston's OTL 1660 death that is being referred to.
Yes, that's what I meant.
Post by j***@gmail.com
I will, however, note another possibility - Gaston in OTL married a
second time, to a princess of lorraine. They had children, several.
The second youngest was a son, Jean Gaston, born in 1650. He died in
infancy in 1652, but butterflies might allow him to survive. Their
last child was born in 1652. It was a daughter, but she survived to
adulthood. So it's possible that Gaston will have a son to succeed
him, either by making Jean Gaston live, or by making that youngest
child a son. That, it seems to me, works better for a "weak France"
model than Condé becoming king - you get 8 years of weak child king
Louis XIV, than 9 years of weak adult king Gaston, then at least
another 10 years or so of a child king.
BTW, looking at the older daughters - they were married into the house
of Guise, the house of medici in Tuscany and to the house of Savoy.The
last marriage was to (Wikipedia)
"Charles Emmanuel II (June 20, 1634 - June 12, 1675) was the Duke of
Savoy from 1638 to 1675 and under regency of his mother Christine Marie
of France until 1663."

You (John) mention him further down, and especially with his mother, he
does seem another possible match for Anne.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
One nice prerequisite for trouble: Condé cannot marry Anne to solidify
his claim, since he is married since he is married since 1641, to a
niece of Richelieu. She has born him a son in 1443, who is 16 years
younger than Anne, so marrying them to each other seems out, as well.
Condé's younger brother Conti is, however, available. I'm not sure if
Condé would want to make that match, though.
But might Gaston want to make it, *if* Condé still leaves for Spain
after alienating most other frondeurs? The Parlement de Paris might be
convinced to dig up some statute that allows banning Condé and his
infant son from the inheritance, so making Conti the heir presumptive
and the son-in-law of the king.

If this happens (is it chronologically possible?) before Reine
Marguerite (the Lorraine wife) has her final son (or Jean Gaston
unexpectedly survives), we might have a nice three-way conflict once
Gaston dies - Condé claiming his exclusion is void, Conti stressing
*his* claim and the (admittedly anti-Salic) one of his wife and of
course the claim of the infant Dauphin. I guess that in the "born in
1652" variant both other parties will claim wild stuff about a
stillborn son being exchanged etc., like the accusations regarding
James III/VIII. IOW, le Dauphin n'est pas le vrai Dauphin.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by L***@gmail.com
And meanwhile, Conde and Anne were apparently going at it OTL daggers
drawn during and after the Fronde. In the ATL, I see no reason for this
to be substantially better; if he is in fact heir, it may be rather
worse. She may end up conspiring against him, and he against her.
Well, I count on this. France will be in some trouble.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by L***@gmail.com
He may still well be in exile in Spain during this era, though he may
return with greater haste, given his frusteration there and his higher
rank as heir to the throne. He may still end up at the Battle of the
Dunes, however, and the Peace of the Pyrenees is still a decade-ish
after your PoD.
I don't believe Condé went into exile until after the proposed POD.
So it's possible he'll never go into exile. it'll depend on how he
gets along with the new king, I should imagine, and also on whether or
not he's the heir-presumptive.
I agree that there is no definite course of events. I *am* under the
impression that Condé was excellent at alienating people and if the
new king does not award him the honors and importance he expects to get
...
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
Oh, I think William of Orange would make off with that, or at least,
some of it.
Sounds likely, *if* he ever comes to power (he will exist, being born
in November 1650). With Louis XIV dead, there will not even be vaguely
the events that led France to attack the Dutch in 1672. So De Witt
might stay in power until his resigantion or natural death, whereas
Willem van Oranje, het kind van state, may lead a quiet private life
with a lover of his choice.
Depends; I can't see Conde, made king, being a non-threat to the
Netherlands.
Well, he's a threat to the *Spanish* Netherlands, and this will incur
Dutch opposition. But I've always felt that the 1672 "crush the Dutch"
campaign had some weird psychological causes on Louis XIV's part.
Technically, it was a desire for revenge since the Dutch had stopped
his march to triumph during the War of Devolution (he had already
agreed with Austria on a later partition of the Spanish empire and
secured his claims on the SNL, the FrancheComté and Naples-Sicily when
the Dutch-English-Swedish triple alliance blocked that). But the
vehemency seems to have been based inside the Sun King's mind, I agree.

Note that nothing similar to the War of Devolution will happen in this
TL. I do not even know whom Maria Teresa of Spain might be married to.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
(Mary "II" won't be born in this TL, and
the Orange-Stuart marriage is highly contingent of the Anglo-Dutch
relations.)
Hmm. Maybe; I'm less certain than you. But the whole fun intercetion of
Stuarts and Europe needs to be definatively sorted out for other things
to be effectively asserted as true or false here.
Yes.
And that of course would lead to a discussion of the possible
alternatives to the style of Restoration he had OTL, a topic not
unheard of here in shwi.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Spain? Portugal? Perhaps even Italy? OTOH, the fate of Chrales II is
highly chance-driven. Hm, Worcester is in 1651. After his flight from
England, CII might not even return to France if there is serious
trouble brewing. He might go (almost) directly to The Hague (or to
Breda) and take his mother with him. Or not. Henrietta and James staying
in France, the latter fighting in the wars among the nobles has a
certain charme, too.
Agreed; Charles II grows up under the protection of his sister, while
Mommy, Henrietta, and James fight it out in France, siding with Anne
against Conde...or trying to marry James and Henrietta to Anne and
Conde...
Charles II was already rather grown up in 1651 - he was 21 years old,
and, er, older than his sister.
Yes. The suggested double marriage of the houses of Bourbon and Stuart
sounds like an interesting project to generate more trouble for France
*and* England.
Post by j***@gmail.com
I do wonder if Gaston is going to be
quite the cipher that you guys all anticipate him being. Even if
Mazarin is gone (as is likely), Gaston will have the bureaucracy that
Richelieu and Mazarin built to work with, and there are presumably some
effective civil servants who will be loyally serving the crown. I
think Gaston's brother's reign demonstrates that you don't need a
competent king to have a competent reign. Obviously the situation will
be difficult, especially if the king can't control his crazy daughter,
but I think he has advantages that you have not considered. Above all,
he is an adult king. There is no more regency, and no more child king,
and no more hated favorite, and no more hated foreign regent. It's one
thing to rise up against a foreign regent and her foreign
favorite/lover. It's quite another to rise up against the lawful,
adult king. Even if Gaston is a dunce, he'll have the full power of
the state behind him, and that's not nothing.
I concede that he has something, all right. But still, the bureaucracy
is not *that* entrenched yet, not if Gaston is too weak to avoid making
concession to his co-frondeurs. There might be an continued weakening
of the mid- and low-level nobility (and especially the nobleese de
robe), but a strengthening of the top-level ones, those controlling
entire provinces.

Plus, I think we can assume that he will have the support of Turenne -
I see nothing to indicate that this great general will oppose a
rightful King Gaston unless the latter does really stupid things.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
I think the Princess of Orange might be able to do something for her
brother, if not her Papist mother, alliances to the English republic
aside. Monck is still around, and one thing should lead to another,
more or less.
The Princess was rather unpopular in the Netherlands, AFAIK.
Ah, well. Her reputation might sustain her brother's arrival, if not
that of her Papist mother.
I believe that Mary was mostly living in Breda, an enclave in the south
of the United Provinces which were personal property of the Oranges.
This should be fairly safe, whatever the political situation over in
Holland.
Charles II lived also mostly in Breda, AFAIK. I thought of The Haqgue
mainly because he hat met Lucy Walter there, I guess. (But Monmouth was
born in Rotterdam, IIRC.)
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
The Dutch Golden Age is not yet over, but they are much too weak
militarily.
Quite; but they're still stronger than Spain in this era, mas o menos.
Which means a larger Dutch Republic, including OTL's Belgium...
Not under De Witt, I think. Catholic peasants and rivalling Flemish
merchants - what are they good for? But the Dutch might take additional
Spanish colonial possessions and keep others like New Amsterdam.
Interesting; say on, good sir, say on.
The Dutch have just ended their war with Spain. Why start it again
when Spain looks basically helpless? The existence of the Spanish
Netherlands is the best protection against France, at any rate.
I agree, my bad. During the 1650s, there is no one to fight for the
Dutch but the English, and I do not see how King Gaston will affect
that. I guess it depends a bit on his relation to the Cromwell regime,
but not overly much. In this time France cannot threaten England nor
the Netherlands.

BTW, how did Gaston feel about the execution of Charles I and what did
he think about Charles II? Is there any indacation that he might have
tried to implement an active anti-Cromwell policy?

Since I just realize that this might really influence the events of the
French-Spanish War - battle of the Dunes and all that, perhaps even
changing the Anglo-Spanish War of 1654 into a Anglo-French one.

(Someone should heavily edit the wikipedia article "Treaty of the
Pyrenees". It makes it look like a local Catalan event, which is not
simply not right, regardless of the Roussillon changing hands.)
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by L***@gmail.com
And I agree re Belgium, at least in part, as it might serve as a useful
buffer against expanding French whatever.
But there will be much less expanding France. The regents, at any
rate, want peace, and are not going to attack poor helpless Spain. If
the Oranges come back, all bets are off, though.
Of course, but I still would say the States' Party of De Witt has much
better chances of survival in this TL.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
William III spends his young life in the field against a weak and
divided France, only to be made King of England. Hmm. Due to
butterflies, the Protestand Union becomes the 800 pound gorilla in
Western Europe.
This can't be good
It is also highly unlikely, I think.
I suppose; but it'd give us a Northern European counterpart to the
Hapsburgs, which would be interesting in a Franceless scenario...
Oh, of course, it would be fun.

"My name is De Vlaming, Jan de Vlaming"
His opponent gasped. De Vlaming, better known as 'Agent Orange', the
top spy of the Protestant Alliance!
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Brandenburg is still in its infancy.
Verily, but rising fast. I can't see what would stop it from continuing
to grow through this era. Though without Louis XIV, we don't get the
War of Spanish Succession, but Queen Anne might find her own way to
knit France together, as Regent for her adorable sons and her
weak-willed husband, who's mind is "too delicate for this world"
Might happen. It would be interesting just to see who the husband might
be ...
John Kenney, pick up the White Courtesy Phone...
Er. There's any number of possibilities. If Condé is dominant, it's
likely she'll be married off to a foreigner. Charles Emmanuel II of
Savoy (7 years younger than her) seems a possibility. Gaston has
connections to the Lorraines, but I don't think there's any Lorraines
of the right age.
But, btw, his brother-in-law, Charles IV, the Duke of Lorraine has been
fighting for Spain (and his territory occupied by France) since the
1640s. In OTL 1654 he was arrested by them and released in 1659, cannot
if this would happen at all in this TL.

Ferdinand Maria of Bavaria is 9 years younger.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Emperor Ferdinand III's eldest son (the early dying Ferdinand IV) is 6
years younger.
Might he be a possible candidate for Maria Teresa of Spain, who cannot
marry Louis XIV in this TL?
Post by j***@gmail.com
There's no Spanish candidates - Philip IV's son by his
first marriage has already died, and he's already remarried by the time
of the POD. That about exhausts the main Catholic families, besides
the Bourbons themselves (in that case, Armand of Conti, Condé's
brother, seems the only plausible option, and is rather unlikely).
There's also minor Italian dynasties (Este, Gonzaga, Farnese, Medici),
but that seems as though it would be considered low for the eldest
daughter of the Most Christian King. If she's married off to a
foreigner, she's out of the running in France. I think, all things
considered, the Savoy marriage seems most likely.
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
Time is an important factor, I think. Anne is just 24 in 1651, and for
some years her father Gaston weill hold the title of king. If he is as
ineffectual as OTL, she might not inherit much to work with, or be sold
by her father to the highest bidder. Plus, Condé will definitely deny
that she has any right to inherit the title at all.
A fair point to mull on; but she might be able to outmanoever Daddy,
given her OTL Fronde performance v. his. Is she cold and canny enough
for it?
She doesn't have any right to inherit the title at all, if the title
we're referring to is "Queen of France." It's not going to happen.
The Salic Law is settled - the Guises couldn't overturn it in the
1590s, and Anne of Montpensier won't be able to overturn it in the
1650s, especially when her opponent is as formidable as Condé. Note
that the Parlements will be entirely against her, as well, which is not
a good place to be. Her father is unlikely to be particularly
I guess there is a line missing her.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by L***@gmail.com
Post by Jörg
I very much suspect that Gaston will make concessions to the mighty
nobles (and other parties) that will undo most of the works of
Richelieu and Mazarin.
Probably, yeah. If she, or she and Conde can pick up the peices,
somehow, though
As I said above, I'm not so sure. Gaston's positions as
heir-presumptive and royal uncle are not necessarily his positions as
king. He's a weak man, and once he becomes king he'll be surrounded by
the people who worked for his brother and nephew. It's these types who
will dominate the administration, and they won't be inclined to destroy
their own power. For a comparable example, note that the
administrators who worked for Catherine de Medici continued under Henry
IV, and all the way through to the early years of Louis XIII.
I agree basically, but I think two rather important individuals,
Fouquet and Colbert are too closely associated with the camp of Anne of
Austria and Mazarin too survive politically.
BTW, what do you think of my vague idea of the ambitious Cardinal de
Retz getting the post of chief minister?

Thanks for replying,
Jörg
Loading...