Le petit dauphin survives

so this was something that sprung to mind after s discussion on another thread. Louis, duke of burgundy, otherwise known as le petit dauphin died aged 29 in 1712 from smallpox. A few days later his son the duke of Brittany dies also. The pod here is that neither of them die from smallpox, perhaps due to burgundy's wife not catching and dying from it. Louis was influenced by a group who wished to see a reduction of absolutist power and more power for the aristocracy. What would the consequences of his and his eldest sons survival be for France short term wise as well as in the lib term?
 
Though I would say that reducing the burden on the monarch would de-exhausts the monarchy, I really don't see empowering the aristocracy (and excluding the rising bourgeoisie from the political game) would be a good strategy on the long-term.
 
so this was something that sprung to mind after s discussion on another thread. Louis, duke of burgundy, otherwise known as le petit dauphin died aged 29 in 1712 from smallpox. A few days later his son the duke of Brittany dies also. The pod here is that neither of them die from smallpox, perhaps due to burgundy's wife not catching and dying from it. Louis was influenced by a group who wished to see a reduction of absolutist power and more power for the aristocracy. What would the consequences of his and his eldest sons survival be for France short term wise as well as in the lib term?

If you read between the lines what has been written about this Louis duke of Burgundy was a choleric authoritarian and prétentions bigot. Quite an asshome to sum-up with.

His father, the grand Dauphin, was a far more interesting character. A kind and tolerant man who opposed the repeal of the edict of Nantes.
 
After the death of the Duke of Burgundy, the living members of his entourage, notably Saint-Simon went into the Duke of Orléans' party. A great deal of the "aristocratic monarchy" dreamed in the Tables de Chaulnes and Saint-Simon's projects was put in effect during the Regency, notably the Polysynody. So, Burgundy's death or survival is not very consequential, save for two aspects :

1. would Burgundy had accepted the failure of the polysynody and dissolved the councils ?
2. If Burgundy was the heir, there were no need for a Regency, so no need for dissolving Louis XIV's will, so no right of demonstration for the Parliament.
 
Hmm indeed, if burgundy was still alive and on the throne what makes you say that the councils would still fail?
 
Then there was also his tutor, the bishop of Cambrai who would probably slide his feet under the table in any government headed by Bourgogne. However, taking into account the idea of his wife (a far more interesting and definitely active) character, Bourgogne nicknamed her 'Draco' (after the Athenian statesman), I think Adélaïde de Savoie could've made for an interesting queen (more a Anne of Austria/Catherine de Medicis than Louis XIV's wife or daughter-in-law).
 
Then there was also his tutor, the bishop of Cambrai who would probably slide his feet under the table in any government headed by Bourgogne. However, taking into account the idea of his wife (a far more interesting and definitely active) character, Bourgogne nicknamed her 'Draco' (after the Athenian statesman), I think Adélaïde de Savoie could've made for an interesting queen (more a Anne of Austria/Catherine de Medicis than Louis XIV's wife or daughter-in-law).
Nice, a potential power couple. Would Louis burgundy pursue the similar war mongering policies of his grandfather
 
Nice, a potential power couple. Would Louis burgundy pursue the similar war mongering policies of his grandfather

I didn't call them a power couple. Bourgogne was led by Adélaïde - no two ways about it. She once joked that "should I die, he shall marry a nun", and he'd once told her "Draco, to be your willing slave". More like she'll wear the trousers - she certainly had a keener sense of politics and events on the world arena - she asked Louis XIV when the Act of Settlement was passed "why is a country better ruled by a woman than a man? For when a man rules, the petticoats govern; while when a woman rules, it is the men that govern"
 
I didn't call them a power couple. Bourgogne was led by Adélaïde - no two ways about it. She once joked that "should I die, he shall marry a nun", and he'd once told her "Draco, to be your willing slave". More like she'll wear the trousers - she certainly had a keener sense of politics and events on the world arena - she asked Louis XIV when the Act of Settlement was passed "why is a country better ruled by a woman than a man? For when a man rules, the petticoats govern; while when a woman rules, it is the men that govern"
Oh now that's fascinating. So would she dictates foreign policy toward conciliation or more expansion?
 
Oh now that's fascinating. So would she dictates foreign policy toward conciliation or more expansion?

Most probably not.

Adelaïde of Savoy was caught spying for Savoy during the war of spanish succession. She would have been barred from taking part in the government by what I will quickly call the "deep State" of the kingdom of France.

Marie Leckzinska and Marie-Antoinette were both barred from even but influencing government by their husbands Louis XV and Louis XVI. And none of them ever took active part in foreign intelligence the way Adelaïde of Savoy did.
 
Most probably not.

Adelaïde of Savoy was caught spying for Savoy during the war of spanish succession. She would have been barred from taking part in the government by what I will quickly call the "deep State" of the kingdom of France.

Marie Leckzinska and Marie-Antoinette were both barred from even but influencing government by their husbands Louis XV and Louis XVI. And none of them ever took active part in foreign intelligence the way Adelaïde of Savoy did.

And yet nothing that Adélaïde ever sent to Savoy was actually treasonous. Not to mention she was allowed to rifle through Louis XIV's state papers - which meant that had she wanted to, she could've given the enemy a roadmap. Besides, AFAIK, the "treachery" was only discovered after she died. And even then, Le Roi Soleil merely called her "a naughty little squirrel"
 
And yet nothing that Adélaïde ever sent to Savoy was actually treasonous. Not to mention she was allowed to rifle through Louis XIV's state papers - which meant that had she wanted to, she could've given the enemy a roadmap. Besides, AFAIK, the "treachery" was only discovered after she died. And even then, Le Roi Soleil merely called her "a naughty little squirrel"

Aha brilliant. So it's a mixed bag then?
 
Then there was also his tutor, the bishop of Cambrai who would probably slide his feet under the table in any government headed by Bourgogne. However, taking into account the idea of his wife (a far more interesting and definitely active) character, Bourgogne nicknamed her 'Draco' (after the Athenian statesman), I think Adélaïde de Savoie could've made for an interesting queen (more a Anne of Austria/Catherine de Medicis than Louis XIV's wife or daughter-in-law).
Fenelon died january 1715.

Both Anne and Catherine went active after the death of their husbands, not during their reigns.
 
Fenelon died january 1715.

Both Anne and Catherine went active after the death of their husbands, not during their reigns.

This was anyway an other age. Before Louis XIV developed the administrative/"absolute" monarchy.

Reading Louis XIV's will makes It obvious that a Regency would never again have been entrusted to the mother if the young king, be she queen dowager or not. Regency had become the matter of the men of the Bourbon family.
 
Top