Anjouists love to cite the Duke of Saint-Simon who said “if the king is not French he becomes so upon becoming king.” Context This claim is patently absurd, as can be shown by looking at history and the context of when it was written. This was written in 1711, near the end of War of … More Refuting Saint-Simon
Anjouists claim there have been “foreigners” who have become kings of France. Famously they cite Philip IV, Louis X, Francis II, Henri III, and Henri IV. It is important to state that the requirement of the king being French only came into being after the Hundred Years’ War and was confirmed by Arrêt le Maistre of … More The Myth of Foreign Kings
It is important to note the differences between the Kingdom of Poland and that of Spain — that is to say — the differences between the situations of Henri III and Felipe V of Spain. Poland Poland was an elective monarchy. Henri III was forced to sign the Pacta Conventa, in which Henri acknowledged the system of … More Poland vs. Spain
Time and again we come back to this debate. Arrêt le Maistre denies the throne to “foreign princes,” calling it “contrary to the Salic law.” But the question is, what did the Parlement of Paris mean by “foreign prince.” We, of course, contend that the words should be read by their plain, natural meaning — … More What is a “Foreign Prince”?
The short answer is His Royal Highness the Count of Paris, titular Jean IV of France. To understand this, there needs to be an explanation of history and law. The Fundamental Laws Legitimate succession to the French throne is based upon the Fundamental Laws of the Kingdom of France, which are: 1. Hereditary succession. The throne passes … More Who is the rightful King of France?
Anjouists love to cite Henri François d’Aguesseau as evidence that a Prince of the Blood does not lose his right of succession by becoming a foreigner. We will refute the claims made by d’Aguesseau. Here is the text in question: [62r] February 1713. Observations of the Attorney General d’Aguesseau on a draft letters patent for … More Refuting d’Aguesseau
Anjouists claim that Princes of the Blood have a blood right that supersedes the requirement that the king be French or that Princes of the Blood are automatically French because they have the “blood of France.” We have already presented the legal arguments for the Unionist case, but in this article it is our aim … More The Unionist Case from Tradition
Anjouists love to erroneously claim that Henri IV, because he was born in Bearn, Kingdom of Navarre, was a foreigner or lost his quality as French. This is flatly wrong. The Parlement de Paris ruled in 1505 that Bearnais were naturally French. The general prosecutor for the Crown even went as far as to proclaim that … More Henri IV: Frenchman
We’ve heard the repeated claims of the Anjouists again and again. “There is no nationality requirement,” the say. “The blood right of Princes of the Blood supersedes the law of aubaine,” they say. The notion of “Fundamental Laws” emerged in the 16th century based on customs dating back centuries. The Inalienability of the Crown made … More Against Anjouism
Nationality in the Ancien Regime The term “nationality” was not used in the Ancien Regime. However, there was a tradition and understanding of who was French (Regnicole) and who was not (etranger; aubain). The former was someone born in the kingdom or under the obedient lordships (vassals) of the king (jus soli) and who remained … More Nationality and Henri IV