How to get Felipe V of Spain, onto the throne of France?

So, as some might know, I started a thread asking which one of the sons of Felipe V should establish a lasting dynasty in Spain, and one of the commentators put Louis I as it would enable Felipe to abdicate as he did in 1724, and potentially make it easier for him to reclaim his place in the succession for the French throne. Now, how likely is that to be successful? Would the Treaty of Utrecht be negated, or would others worry that the rigid interpretation of Salic Law would lead to another union under his son Louis?

If so, then, another query I have is this: In 1712, I believe, Felipe was offered a confirmation of his place in the succession for France, if he would renounce his rights to the Spanish throne in favour of his brother the Duke of Berry. Now Felipe refused. However, what would be needed, either for Felipe to accept this, and for Charles, Duke of Berry to become Carlos III of Spain, and for Felipe perhaps through a series of unfortunate events to the mainline, to become King Felipe VII of France? Alternatively, what would be needed for Felipe to refuse the throne of Spain in 1700, when Carlos II dies and for his brother Charles, Duke of Berry to accept the mantle instead?

Essentially, my question is this, what is the best way to ensure Felipe keeps his place in the French succession, and to enable a potential succession between 1715-1724?

Thanks.
 

Vitruvius

Donor
It would probably have to be settled during the War of the Spanish Succession so whatever peace that ends the war acknowledges Philip's place in the French Succession. He'd never decline the Spanish throne when Carlos II dies unless his elder brother had died and he was the heir of the Dauphin otherwise why would he turn down a real thrown for the (then) far off possibility that he may one day succeed to the French throne because a bunch of his relatives conveniently died.

So maybe if Louis XV dies at the same time as his father and brother then Philip could abdicate the Spanish throne in favor of Berry. Since at that point he has only one son (Philip wouldn't be born for several months) and the Bourbon's need a viable candidate for the Spanish throne which is still being contested if he abdicates it would end his line's claim to the Spanish throne in favor of his brother's. Of course in the long run there may be problems there as OTL Berry had no children (though he could live longer and father some his wife's string of miscarriages doesn't bode well).

After the war is over it's hard to see Philip getting the French throne. Even if Louis XV dies, and even if the French agree to disregard the renunciations in the Treaty of Utrecht, how do they make it work? Philip abdicates in favor of his second son (either Philip or Ferdinand, depending on who's alive) and moves to France with his elder son Louis. Even if the Bourbon's overcome the opposition of all the powers they just fought 10-15 years previously, the situation is still precarious. There's a child King on the throne of Spain with no obvious regent. Elisabeth Farnese probably moves to France with Philip, which is for the best as she'd be a terrible Regent for her stepson, openly favoring her own sons over those of the King's first marriage and attempting to use Spain to advance her son's Italian pretensions. She'd probably attempt the same in France, which will cause problems with Orleans, Berry and whoever else is around to oppose her party. And if anything happened to the new Dauphin (and remember Luis didn't make it OTL), we're right back as square one with Philip's second son (the underage King of Spain) becoming Dauphin, and having to abdicate in favor of a still younger brother. I could see Louis' death being blamed on Elisabeth, accusations that she poisoned him to elevate one of her sons to the Spanish throne.

So is Philip VI/Ferdinand IV left under the care of some Spanish nobles? Is Berry sent down there to act as Regent? Neither situation is ideal. Spain is probably going to lose any momentum that Philip's wartime reforms may have given it and return to a moribund state, with the elites fretting over the succession. So any scenario after 1714 with Philip becoming King of France would be a mess.
 
Okay so the most likely scenario then is that Louis xv would need to die the same time as his brother and father, thus forcing Philip to abdicate as part of the treaty of Utrecht and hand over the throne of Spain to Charles duke of berry. In such a scenario would Felipe still marry Elisabeth Farnese, if his first wife still dies?
 

Vitruvius

Donor
The problem is the outsized influence enjoyed by Cardinal Alberoni, who favored Elisabeth Farnese. But if Philip is King of France when he remarries the situation is far different. Maybe Louise Adelaide d'Orleans? She was Berry's sister in law. Less likely but more interesting Maria Kazimiera Sobieska, or maybe a different (admittedly even less less likely) Italian match with Benedetta Maria d'Este. Or possibly Maria Anna of Neuburg, neice of the Elector and cousin of Charles VI. If the Princess des Ursins still has influence over Philip she may favor a foreign princess who she perceived as week, hence Sobieska of d'Este. If Philip needs to secure peace with the allies then maybe Neuburg. If he's trying to settle accounts internally in France, after the death of his grandfather then maybe d'Orleans. But Farnese is still a contender.
 
Alright interesting , would alberoni still gain influence if Felipe was king of France? Or would he be keeping his eye on the duke of berry? Orleans or Sobieska would make good candidates otherwise.
 

Vitruvius

Donor
No idea. I think it's just a question of who remains in Philip's orbit after he becomes King of France. I could see Ursins following him but Alberoni might have a hard time, as a foreigner, maintaining his influence against the other more established forces in the French court.

The exact nature of the Peace ending the war is also important. OTL the allies gave up their opposition to a Bourbon on the Spanish throne, here with fewer degrees of separation between the French and Spanish thrones, maybe they'd keep fighting. Berry's childlessness is also going to be a pressing concern. I mean what happens if he dies without leaving any living children? I have no idea. Another war, probably. A younger son of Philip makes a claim? A Habsburg Archduke or someone married to an Archduchess? The King of Sicily (Savoy)?
 
This is true. I do
Imagine that with a pod in 1712 it wouldn't be unimaginable that berry could have surviving issue by the time the treaty is signed thus negating some concerns?

Also, is there someone Felipe could've married sooner either before or just after Carlos II died, that would have given him children who'd be approaching adulthood around the time of utrecht or the war of the quadruple alliance?
 
I suppose another big question would be, if Louis XV dies a few months after Louis XIV in 1715, does this trigger another succession war?

And, having done some more reading over Felipe V and Maria Louise of Savoy, I learned they married in 1701, when she was but thirteen, hence the reason for the long delay in them having kids. I do wonder, is there anyone who was around seventeen, eighteen around that time, or of an age with Felipe, that he could marry, so that there was a higher chance of having an immediate heir. Is there a chance he could marry Maria Louise's older sister Maria Adelaide? Thus potentially allowing Louis, Duke of Burgundy to marry someone else?
 
Another query popped into my head, was it possible for Louis XV to declare Philip V his legal heir under the principle of salic law, and that as King his word was law?
 
So here is everything I can find on the forums regarding the Spanish and French successions as delineated both before and after Utrecht:

The year 1712 was a «terrible» year.
The Year 1712 was a leap year starting on Friday: double misfortune?
It's a "double" leap year in the Swedish calendar, with Friday, February 30.

A summary of the facts that interest us:

29 January 1712 - the Congress of Utrecht opened;
John Robinson (7 November 1650 – 11 April 1723), Bishop of Bristol, Lord Privy-Seal, and Thomas Wentworth (1672 – 15 November 1739), Lord Strafford, was the British representatives;
Bruno van der Dussen (9 August 1660-2 February 1741) pensionery and Mayor of Gouda, and Willem Buys (May 27, 1661 - February 18, 1749), pensionary of Amsterdam, Director of the Society of Suriname and the colony of Berbice, was the Dutch representatives;
Marshal Nicolas Chalon du Blé, marquis d'Uxelles (24 January 1652 – 10 April 1730), Cardinal Melchior de Polignac (11 October 1661 – 20 November 1742) and Nicolas Mesnager (17 May 1658 – 15 June 1714), chevalier de l'Ordre de Saint-Michel, was the French representatives;
The ministers of the Emperor and the of Duke of Savoy assisted, and the other allies sent also plenipotentiaries, though with the utmost reluctance.
As England and france were the only two powers that were seriously inclined to peace, it may be supposed that all the other deputies served rather to retard than advance its progress.
They met rather to start new difficulties, and widen the breach, than to quiet the dismissions of Europe.
The English ministers, therefore, finding multiplied obstructions from the deliberations of their allies, set on foot a private negotiation with France. They stipulated certain advantages for the subjects of Great Britain in a concerted plan of peace. They resolved to enter into such mutual confidence with the French as would anticipate all clandestine transactions to the prejudice of the coalition; The number of different interests concerned, and the great enmity and jealousy subsisting between all, made it impossible that all could be satisfied;
[Pinnock's Improved Edition of Dr. Goldsmith's History of England];

12 February 1712 - Death of the Dauphine of France Marie Adélaïde of Savoy for measles;

18 February 1712 - Death of the Dauphin of France Louis for measles;

8 March 1712 - Death of Louis, Duke of Brittany, became Dauphin of France for measles;

13 March 1712 [suppose] («Dominica I. Passionis» called "Judica" in Vetus Ordo, Fifth Sunday of Lent according to the Novus Ordo) - Death of Louis, Duke of Anjou, became Dauphin of France for measles;
The death of the fourth Dauphin within the year created an international crisis, because Philip of Anjou, whom Great Britain was poised to acknowledge as Philip V of Spain, now became Louis XIV's heir
The union between France and Spain under a single ruler, was an eventuality that would have catastrophic implications for the European balance of power.
Peace was out of the question unless a formula could be devised providing against a union of these two mighty nations.
=> The Queen of Spain Maria Luisa of Savoy was at the sixth month of pregnancy;

15 March 1712 - The Abbé Gaultier[1] wrote to the French Foreign Minister Torcy: «The Queen [Anne of Great Britain] has been visibly moved by the misfortunes that have recently taken place in France».
He explained that because she feared that others would use this as an excuse to prolong the war, she considered it imperative that some way was found of preventing a union of crowns. In her view the most satisfactory means would be for Philip of Anjou to make a «formal renunciation» of his right to the French throne;

22 March 1712 - Philip of Anjou, from Madrid, wrote to Louis XIV: «I can not express to your Majesty how much I significantly affected cruel misfortunes that follow one another so closely to each other. Your pain penetrates more deeply to me that you could not imagine, and I constantly think of the sentences of a grandfather I would like to see filled with all kinds of pleasures. [...] I also hope that these fatal events do not bring no difficulties to peace. It is, in truth, to fear they change the favorable provisions met there before. But I hope that God will deign to put a happy ending to such an important book that one and bless the righteous steps you take for it. I beg your Majesty to go all the justice I deserve the feelings I have for her, and still continue to please me his friendship which is so dear to me.»

23 March 1712 - Torcy informed Lord Henry St John, future 1st Viscount Bolingbroke (1678 – 1751), Secretary of Statethat the rules governing succession to the French throne were subject to modification only by God, and hence «the renunciation desired would be null and invalid» [Lois Fondamentales du Royaume de France: Loi Fondamentale d'Indisponibilité de la Couronne (Fundamental Law of Unavailability of the Crown)].
However, when a firm reply was sent, indicating that the expedient proposed was «the only in the Queen's opinion capable of affording the smallest hope», the French relented.
They agreed that, provided Philip divested himself of his rights by a "voluntary cession", the succession could be altered.
The French suggested that there was no need for Philip to make his decision unless the young Dauphin died, but this was rejected by the British. They insisted that two alternatives must be put to him immediately: (1) to remain King of Spain, and give up all claim to the French throne; or (2) retain his French inheritance rights, abdicate his current crow, and evacuate Spain promptly;

18 April 1712 - a messenger set out from France to present Philip with these two proposals.

25 April 1712 - «Lord Oxford's Plan»: from the British point of view it was infinitely preferable that Philip should indeed agree to vacance his current throne, he was now offered an incentive to do so. In a memorandum of the Earl of Oxford outlined a new set of proposals affording Philip some compensation for altering his status. Within days Oxford's plan had been trasmitted to france, where it was well received by Louis XIV.

26 April 1712 - Louis XIV wrote to Philip: «I hope that you put me in a position to make a glorious peace, keeping the crown that you have on your head, and which has already cost so much blood and so much trouble».

28 April 1712 - Not receiving by Philp the answer he waited, anxious impatience, Louis XIV emphasizes more strongly his exhortations in a long despatch addressed to the Marquis of Bonnac for producing a decisive resolution: «It is necessary that my little son takes his party, or come back now in France if he wants to maintain his rights, or to abandon them and to keep the Kingdom of Spain for himself and his posterity ... we have always believed, and I can say with reason that peace would be glorious if I kept the Catholic King of Spain and the Indies, and the times are still far from where the hope of obtaining such conditions seemed reckless. The fate of arms has not changed; however, losses have increased; but the chances to support the war are not only decreased, but run out completely; Spain does not give me any help. [...] I can not believe he wish, only for his own interests, that I obliged to sacrifice my kingdom for the continuation of a war that my subjects are no longer able to support. [...] I look forward to the news of the resolution that will be taken by him, and I send you as special courier for squeeze him, supposing that he has not yet determined. Mine [resolution] is to make peace in any manner whatsoever; if the king my son toddler concurs with me, this to will be advantageous and glorious for him, as I have always wanted».
And wrote to Philip:

13 May 1712 - Torcy informed St.John that his master had joust despatched another messanger to Spain to let Philip know of the deal now on offer, and asking him speedily to signify whether it would be acceptable. Torcy urged that while they awaited Philip's reply, the Queen should announce a suspension of arms. «I would be very unfortunate should any event of the campaign disturb our present good diposition towards the re-establishment of public tranquillity», he wrote silkily.

20 and 21 May 1712 - Torcy's letter arrived in England on the evening, and St.John and Oxford read it to the Queen the following morning. As Gaultier reported, «Her Majesty was so content ad satisfied with it that on the spot she commanded Mr. St.John to despatch a courier to the Duke of Ormonde, with express orders on her part to undertake nothing, neither directly nor indirectly, against the King's army until new orders came».
In effect, Anne's ministers had abandoned their allies in the field and made a separate deal with France, but they were convinced they had reached the best agreement possible, not just for themselves, but also for the other members of the Grand Alliance who were asked to join the Anglo-French suspension of arms.

7 June 1712 - birth of Infante Philip Peter Gabriel of Spain; «The queen [Maria Luisa] gave to your Majesty a grand-son, big and tall, and perhaps even more beautiful than the Prince of Asturias. The labor lasted so little, we can say that delivery has never been happier. [...] Is all the more I am convinced that we can hardly give you a more pleasant news».

8 July 1712 - With a solemn proclamation, read by the municipal authorities in all cities of Spain, and displayed on the main buildings, was officially known to the Spanish people the important resolution that the king had taken.
«The assurance that the crowns of Spain and France will never be put on the same head [...] was as preliminary in views we have had for peace, mainly in the proposals that have been made in England [...] It is on this and other preliminary agreed that the conference to be held in Utrecht, during which negotiations [...] unexpected death of the Dauphins, Britain came [...] to propose and support [...] I had to renonçasse, on my behalf and on behalf of all my descendants, now and forever, the Spanish monarchy or that of France, so that if I was living in Spain, none of my successors could never succeed to that of France, and that those who rule or reign in France, nor any other prince who comes from the family or who is born, will never have the crown of Spain».

29 August 1712 - A dangerous illness which kept Philip for several weeks, away from Madrid; Wrote Philip: «My illness is a double quartan that was violent, and even very dangerous in the early days ... But the danger is past; there are only a weak debility and disgust. I lost completely the taste for coffee and tobacco; there are now five weeks as it lasts, that is to say that I've been sick for the most cruel heat of this country».


Philip and Maria Luisa of Savoy had, at this time:
the Infante Louis Philip, born on 25 August 1707, heir apparent and recognized as Prince of Asturias by the Cortes on 7 April 1709;
the Infante Philip Louis, born on 2 July 1709 and died 18 July 1709;
the Infante Philip Peter Gabriel of Spain, born on 7 June 1712.


First scenario.
Philip became Dauphin of France and his son Louis Philip received the title of Duke of Burgundy (or Duke of Brittany) and was the second-in-line heir to the French Crown.
Philip renounced to the Crown of Spain in favor of his younger brother Charles Duke of Berry [in agreement with the testament of Charles II, king of Spain], who was became Charles III, King of Spain. At this time the Duke of Berry had no living children. In July 1711, his young wife, Marie Louise Élisabeth d'Orléans, gave birth to her first child, a girl, at the Palace of Fontainebleau. The girl lived only two days and her death was blamed on the king who had made her mother travel with the Court to Fontainebleau despite the doctors advising her to stay at Versailles or at the Palais Royal because of her advanced pregnancy. With the transfer to the Court of Spain, the Duke de Berry probably would not have died on 5 May 1714, from internal injuries sustained in a hunting accident, and his children survived the childhood.
End the war, Treaties of peace, partition of the Spanish empire and European Balance of Power are the same that in reality.

Second scenario.
With the birth of Infante Philip Peter Gabriel on 7 June 1712, Philip has had this opportunity and he takes time before making a decision[2]: he became Dauphin of France and his son Louis Philip received the title of Duke of Burgundy (or Duke of Brittany) and was the second-in-line heir to the French Crown. Philip renounced to the Crown of Spain in favor of his younger son Philip Peter Gabriel and proclaimed himself "Regent" or he has entrusted the regency to the Queen Maria Luisa.
Charles Duke of Berry remained in his rights to the French Crown.
End the war, Treaties of peace, partition of the Spanish empire and European Balance of Power are the same that in reality?
Philip would be king of France and regent of Spain?
It actually, he can govern both the kingdoms?
Or he would be just the nominal ruler of one of the two nations?
The feeble hand of Philip, became King of France, can keep also the crown of Spain on the head of his child?

Third scenario.
With the birth of Infante Philip Peter Gabriel on 7 June 1712, Philip has had this opportunity and he takes time before making a decision[2]: he renounced (or bypassed) to his rights to the French Crown [but in in formal contradiction with the «Lois Fondamentales du Royaume de France»; however, these same laws, in reality, were neglected/broken with the recognition, in the peace treaties, of the renunciation extorted to Philip!] in favor of his eldest son Louis Philip, recognized Dauphin of France.
Philip remained King of Spain and his younger son Philip Peter Gabriel became heir apparent.
Charles Duke of Berry remained in his rights to the French Crown and he could become the future regent in France.
End the war, Treaties of peace, partition of the Spanish empire and European Balance of Power are the same that in reality?

Fourth scenario.
Realization of the Lord Oxford's Plan.

Robert Harley, 1st Earl of Oxford (1661–1724) envisaged that the Duke of Savoy [Victor Amadeus II (14 May 1666 – 31 October 1732)] should became King of Spain in Philip's place, and in exchange Philip would be given Savoy and the kingdom of Sicily.
Philip subsequently (suggestion: when he inherited the French Crown?) would be required to surrender Sicily to the Emperor.
The Queen Anna's approval could be counted on, as she had fond feelings for her first cousin, the Duchess of Savoy, Anne Marie d'Orléans (27 August 1669 – 26 August 1728), dating from the time they had shared a nursery during Anne's childhood visit to France.

Although after the failure of the First Partition Treaty of 1698 and in subsequent negotiations, Victor Amadeus II has rejected the Louis XIV's proposal to cede his lands to France in exchange for the kingdoms of Sicily and Naples, both possessions of the Spanish (because Victor Amadeus was unwilling to make up the Principality of Piedmont[3]; Victor Amadeus's real interest was in acquiring the Duchy of Milan[4], and he was willing to exchange, before for his [hypothetical] rights over the countryside of Auvergne, Clermont and the Duchy of Brittany, then for the Duchy of Savoy and County of Nice), now at the peace negotiations the Savoyard ambassador, Ignazio Solaro di Moretta (1662 – 1743) Marchese del Borgo, suggested exchanging the Savoyard state for Naples, Sicily and the Spanish-held State of the Presidi in central Italy (the British argued, partly in their own interests as well as those of Savoy, this exchange; the Imperial envoy Karl von Zinzendorf mooted proposals for the Savoyard acquisition of Milan or Sicily).

In the reality, in late May, however, although the Queen Anna believed that there were compelling reasons to avoid further fighting, she dared not yet declare an official suspension of arms. Instead, she deemed it preferable to wait until Philip's answer arrived, telling Oxford she trusted «the prospect King Philip had of succeeding to the crown of france would be an inducement... to be easy with that allotment» of Savoy an Sicily. Once that had been settled, the new European order could be made public. If the Duke of Savoy became King of Spain, it would satisfy the parliamentary requirement that Spanish throne should be kept out of Bourbon hands, and once, presented with a "fait accompli", the Emperor and the Dutch were unlikely to withstand the new arrangements. In the meantime, all that was necessary was to keep the armies of both side idle [Anne Somerset, «Queen Anne: The Politics of Passion»].

Reign over the kingdom of France after his grandfather and govern as regent, at the same time, Spain, where reign his a minor child (male or female): such was the glorious and naïve chimera that the advice of the young Queen Maria Luisa had raised in the timid spirit of Philippe and that he caressed, at the moment, and charmed his imagination.
«The King», wrote Bonnac[5], «even though loves Spain, perhaps he consents to opt for France if the need absolutely requires him there, but the queen [Maria Luisa], who, as you know, who thinks with a lot of elevation, always, will want to retain everything» [Bonnac to Torcy, 4 April 1712]. And again: «So far, it has formed another idea [...] that keep for him one of the two kingdoms, and leaving the other to one of the princes his children. Her Majesty told me that She would work, however, without delay, the cleverest people in his kingdom to review all precautions to prevent the meeting of the two crowns in the same person» [Bonnac to Louis XIV, 11 April 1712].
Philp wrote to Louis XIV: «These are my thoughts. Turning now to the answer that you ask me, I begin to admit that I was surprised to see that before making proposals, such as the past, we did not think to reassure at same time the enemies by their fear of the meeting of the two monarchies [...] that one of my sons could reign over one of the two kingdoms, while I reign over the other, without meddle in any way into govern or into any of mine to him».

Question/Problem of Sicily in this scenario.
Queen Anne informed the Savoyard ambassador Conte Annibale Carlo Maffei (1667 – 1735) on 23 June 1712, that the British intended to give him Sicily, which, because of the superiority of their Mediterranean Fleet, was in their power to demand. The French were informed the same day, and on 4 September Philip V of Spain consented to relinquish his claim on Sicily. The division of the Spanish empire was designed in part to recognise Savoy's claim to the Spanish inheritance, but more to strike a balance of power in favour of her ally, Britain.[6] As historian Geoffrey Symcox noted, Victor Amadeus «would be bound by the Anglo-French agreement not to dispose of the island or exchange it for other territory, which showed that he had been installed there not in full sovereignty but as guardian of British interests, at Britain's pleasure». These limitations were written into the subsequent Treaty of Utrecht (11 April 1713) between France and Savoy.

[1] The Abbé Francois Gaultier (1670-1721) was an agent or spy for the French Foreign Minister, Jean-Baptiste Colbert, Marquis de Torcy. Through much of the War of the Spanish Succession he lived in England and communicated with Torcy in coded letters. He assumed several roles in the settlement of Utrecht. His most prominent role was to provide a channel of communication which allowed the Earl of Oxford and the Duke of Shrewsbury, leaders in the new Tory ministry of 1710, to negotiate secretly with Torcy and to avoid the scrutiny of the Dutch, the Austrians, and members of their own cabinet. During the negotiations at Utrecht he served the French Plenipotentiaries and acted as a courier for Torcy. He corresponded on behalf of Oxford and Viscount Bolingbroke with the Stuart Pretender in France.
[2] Philip V had wait for a few months, his signature to his renunciations. Its treaties with Queen Anne, the Duke of Savoy and Holland, bear the dates of 10 July, 13 August 1713 and 20 June 1714.
[3] After the Treaty of Lyon (January 17, 1601) Charles Emmanuel I wrote: «it is much better to have a state united (compact), how is this here from the mountains, that two, all two insicure, especially since, possessing the Marquis of Saluzzo, it makes it's very difficult, for the French, invasion of Italy».
[4] The Duchy of Milan was in possession of Austria since 1706, since, on 26 September, Prince Eugene of Savoy had made his entrance into the city.
[5] Jean Louis d'Usson, Marquis de Bonnac (1672-1738), nephew of François d'Usson de Bonrepaus, former clerk of the Navy, which enjoyed some credit to the court, through the protection of Seignelay and Croissy represented in recent months, from May 1711 was French envoy extraordinary to the Spanish court. He was a clever diplomat, careful and shrewd observer.




View attachment 249087

I was wondering how it would be the partition of the Spanish possessions in Europe in the Treaties of Utrecht, Rastatt, Baden with the realization of the Lord Oxford's Plan.
Rationally, in the spirit of «The European Balance of Power» and to mantain the peace, they would have to be assigned to Philip of Anjou Spanish Netherlands and Duchy of Milan, with the Savoy possessions; to Emperor Charles VI Kingdom of Naples, Sicily and Sardinia.
Became King of France, Philip could annex the Savoy transalpine possessions (Duchy of Savoy and County of Nice), perhaps even the Spanish Netherlands, and he could create an independent domain for one of his sons with the Principality of Piedmont and Duchy of Milan, with the addition, if, as in reality, he married Elisabetta Farnese, of the Duchy of Parma.

But I would not be surprised if, as in the Judgment of Solomon, they would have to be assigned to Philip of Anjou the north of the Spanish Netherlands and to Emperor Charles VI the Duchy of Luxembourg, to Philip the Savoy possessions and to Charles VI the Duchy of Milan, to Philip the Kingdom of Sardinia and to Charles VI the Kingdom of Naples and the Kingdom of Sicily (Question/Problem of Sicily: no French Sicily for British interests).


View attachment 249112

The only way to get Berri on the Spanish throne would be to kill the Duc de Bourgogne early on, sometime between 1705 (when his first son the Duc de Bretagne died) and 1707 (when Felipe V's first son Luis and Bourgogne's second Duc de Bretagne were born). If Bourgogne dies childless then Felipe becomes second in line to the French throne, and if the Spanish King has no children then he'll have to abdicate in favor of his younger brother de Berri, who becomes Carlos III. Now how the Spaniards will feel about being second fiddle in matters of succession is anyone's guess (pretty pissed I'd guess) and Felipe V's own willingness to abdicate is doubly in doubt after three to five years as Spain's sovereign, but this was the scenario figured out by both the earlier letters patent confirming that Felipe retained his French rights and the succession spelled out in Carlos II's will.

As to the Duc de Vendôme, that's a mystery to me as well. Though I think the elevation had more to due with his successes in securing Spain for his cousin then anything else. Though it was also around the same time that Louis XIV was bluffing on the possibility of abandoning his grandson's Spanish reign, so it could have just as easily been a ploy by the Princesse des Ursins to undercut Versailles and if necessary steal France's best general.

The discourse is (old and) always one: the "time" is what makes the difference.



Charles, Duke of Berry, had been named in the will of Charles II of Spain as the heir to the Crown of Spain; nevertheless, right of succession it could have been disputed because interpreted by some as valid ONLY with an «immediate» renunciation of succession to the Spanish throne by Philip, Duke of Anjou (therefore the Duke of Berry would not have right to succeed his brother as King of Spain at a later time).
At the same time, while Philip and his sons are alive, he does not have the right to succeed to the Crown of France (in THIS time!)

FIRST "time" discriminating: february-march 1712.
The death of Louis (XV) in february-march 1712, along with the rest of his immediate family, would changed the conditions of the Treaty of Utrecht (signed on 11 April 1713).
«The Fundamental Laws of the Kingdom» bla bla bla... ok. The Crown is not the personal property of the king: the king can not appoint his successor, or waive to the Crown, or abdicate.
Philip V had not right to dispose of the Crown of France, either for himself or for his descendants. A possible renunciation is not legitimate, it can not have legal force.
After the death of Louis (XV), Philip V of Spain becomes heir to the throne of France through the «collatéralité masculine»: in the absence of a male son, the Crown returns to the closest male relative of the King by virtue of the «continuité de la Couronne» (ou instantanéité de la Couronne: «Le roi est mort; vive le roi!»): when the king dies, his successor as soon as king «the king (the government) never dies» (« le roi [l’État] ne meurt jamais»).
The renunciation of Philip V of Spain: bla bla bla... (the renunciation, thus, is not legitimate, it can not have legal force. In France the renunciation is not became Fundamental Law of the Kingdom, because it was avoided to convene the Estates General to the ratified, deceiving the European diplomacy with a simple ratification by the Parliament of Paris (and of other provinces), which, as we know, was a "legal body", not "legislative". The ratification by the Parliament of Paris has a only mere value notarial. Philip V has never recognized the validity of renunciation signed under duress of the England: as a matter of fact, in 1726, he wrote to the Parliament of Paris to be proclaimed King, «in case of death of the King of France his nephew, by being he his successor to the crown by right of birth and by means the fundamental laws of the State, until he can take possession of the kingdom»).

In this hypothesis, the hypothetical Treaty of Utrecht would could to be different: Philip V of Spain at that time already had two sons and Queen Maria Luisa of Savoy was pregnant for the fourth time.
The Foreign Powers would probably have recognized his rights of succession to the Crown of France on condition that he would have to abdicate the Crown of Spain in favor of his second son (possible for the laws of succession of the Spanish kingdoms).

SECOND "time" discriminating: March 1713 (Treaty of Utrecht signed on 11 April 1713).
In Spain the Philip V's renunciations were made Fundamental Laws of the Kingdom by the same sovereign who convoked specifically for this the Cortes in March 1713. This means that, according to the spanish principles of legitimacy, no member of the descendants of Philip V has the right to the Throne of France.
If the renunciation was not declared Fundamental Law of the Kingdom, it could have been considered invalid the renunciation; but a Fundamental Law can be repealed only by the King and the Cortes.

Scilicet: in Spain only the King and the Cortes can cancel the renunciation allowing to a descendant of Philip V to claim the throne of France: by means of a dispensation from the King and the Cortes, an Infante (descendant of Philip V) could claim the throne of France (for this reason the Crown of France, in last nineteenth century, it's up indisputably and unquestionably to the Orléans; with the distinction between "famille et maison" (family and House) and "Couronne" (Crown): there is a clear distinction between the role of heir to the role of "Head of the House" and heir to the French throne).

Really the only time I can think of to get Berri as Carlos III would be in 1700, when Versailles was still unsure of accepting Carlos II's will. Have the Duc de Bourgogne fall ill in early November, not enough to kill him but enough to get Louis XIV to decide to keep Anjou in France. Philippe renounces his Spanish rights, which pass to Charles. Charles accepts and becomes Carlos III. Or flip side have Carlos II nominate Berri as his heir first, then Anjou and Archduke Karl. Those would be the best scenarios to get Berri into Spain.

Personally I've always thought the renunciation clauses in Utrecht were a bit ridiculous. As Charles V proved about one hundred and fifty years earlier, such a massive personal union was unwieldy at best and damn near ungovernable at worst. If Felipe inherited France he'd realistically either abdicate Spain to the next in line (a second son if available or Berri if not) and become Philippe VII or abdicate France instead. Even if he decided to keep both thrones for the time being a Regent/Viceroy would have to be appointed to rule the Kingdom he's not resident in and would no doubt become de-facto sovereign. The whole fear was quite overblown and over the top.

However, I do admit to being confused. I know that on the French side the renunciation had no real legal standing (not being ratified by the Estates General) and was meant as window dressing by Louis XIV. From a legal perspective, if Louis XV had died childless then chances are Felipe V or one of his sons would have been his heir. Although from a practical standpoint there would be no personal union: Felipe V could abdicate and become King of France, leaving one son as King of Spain and the other as Dauphin, or one of his sons could renounce his Spanish succession and become King of France. The part I don't understand is the Spanish Cortes role in all this.

I've never heard that the Cortes had altered Spain's Fundamental Laws of the Realm to forbid their royals any right to succeed in France. For some reason that sounds a bit fishy and legally dubious. I mean for one what right did the Cortes have to legislate the French succession? I mean I can understand forbidding a union between Spain and France, but not trying to dictate who France can and cannot accept as their Sovereign. If you don't mind, do you have a source for the Spanish legislation in 1713?

Finally, to the Orléans rights, one could easily argue that their treason (first the Louis Philippe II, Duc d'Orléans voting for the execution of Louis XVI then his son Louis Philippe III usurping the throne from Charles IX) invalidated their right of succession to the French throne. Just my opinion in any event.
 
1712 was indeed a tough year for the Bourbons on a family level, though on the battlefield things were looking up: the French won a major victory at Denain that summer, and reconquered most of the towns they had lost earlier in the war.
 
So just had a proper read through everything posted there, fascinating read, so really the best time for Felipe to get the French throne would be in 1712, if his nephew the Duke of Anjou, otl's Louis XV died in the same outbreak of measles that killed his father, mother and older brother. As for getting Berry on the throne, that would likely require Louis Duke of Burgundy dying without kids, or falling seriously ill to the point that Louis XIV thinks it more worthwile to keep Philip in Versaille just in case, thus putting forward Charles, Duke of Berry as the French candidate.
 
Further to this, if Felipe V of Spain did become Philippe VII of France, and he had surviving issue at that point, likely, his firstborn son becomes the Dauphin upon his ascension whilst a second born son becomes King of Spain, with the Duke of Berry as regent I'd imagine.
 
An idea that's always sort of interested me if Felipe V were to succeed to the throne of France (and this would probably require some serious handwavium) once esconced as king of Spain, would be if Felipe is reigning in Madrid and Louis XV dies in infancy (he was sickish so it's not a huge leap, I guess). The Cellamare Conspiracy OTL involved anyone who didn't like the duc d'Orléans' Régence (including the duc du Maine (one of the greatest landowners in France after the house of Orléans)). Now, if such were to happen, Felipe were to decide to invade (round about the time of the War of the Quadruple Alliance), and he has support from certain people in France who prefer the Spanish king to the French duke, and he's successful, then he'd have to sop Cerberus (the French allies in the OTL Quadruple Alliance - England, Holland, Austria, etc) by abdicating the Spanish throne, and promising that there's no way that the French and Spanish thrones can unite. So, he abdicates the throne of Spain in favour of his children from his first marriage (they're older so a shorter regency, plus they're born in Spain (and there's two/three of them, an heir and a spare), as opposed to his kids by his second marriage who are still being born (and most will be born in France to King Philippe VII and Queen Élisabeth) who will succeed in France. Now, the idea of France having a king as capable as Carlos III in the mid-18th century is nice, not to mention, with the Orléans defeat in this War of the French Succession, it's unlikely that Luis I will be marrying his OTL bride, so he might have kids. And even if he doesn't, and marries Barbara of Portugal instead, then that means OTL Fernando might marry someone who has health/fertility problems (Barbara had asthma (amongst other ailments) and after her stillborn son(?) in 1733, she never fell pregnant again), so the chances of Spain and France ending up under the same king are slim at best.
 
An idea that's always sort of interested me if Felipe V were to succeed to the throne of France (and this would probably require some serious handwavium) once esconced as king of Spain, would be if Felipe is reigning in Madrid and Louis XV dies in infancy (he was sickish so it's not a huge leap, I guess). The Cellamare Conspiracy OTL involved anyone who didn't like the duc d'Orléans' Régence (including the duc du Maine (one of the greatest landowners in France after the house of Orléans)). Now, if such were to happen, Felipe were to decide to invade (round about the time of the War of the Quadruple Alliance), and he has support from certain people in France who prefer the Spanish king to the French duke, and he's successful, then he'd have to sop Cerberus (the French allies in the OTL Quadruple Alliance - England, Holland, Austria, etc) by abdicating the Spanish throne, and promising that there's no way that the French and Spanish thrones can unite. So, he abdicates the throne of Spain in favour of his children from his first marriage (they're older so a shorter regency, plus they're born in Spain (and there's two/three of them, an heir and a spare), as opposed to his kids by his second marriage who are still being born (and most will be born in France to King Philippe VII and Queen Élisabeth) who will succeed in France. Now, the idea of France having a king as capable as Carlos III in the mid-18th century is nice, not to mention, with the Orléans defeat in this War of the French Succession, it's unlikely that Luis I will be marrying his OTL bride, so he might have kids. And even if he doesn't, and marries Barbara of Portugal instead, then that means OTL Fernando might marry someone who has health/fertility problems (Barbara had asthma (amongst other ailments) and after her stillborn son(?) in 1733, she never fell pregnant again), so the chances of Spain and France ending up under the same king are slim at best.

Okay now that would be very interesting. But wouldn't the same laws that saw people support Felipe, apply to his kids from his first marriage? Unless he got the estates general involved I suppose?
 
Top