Post ww1 French monarchy: Bourbon-Orleans or Bonaparte?

[CrimsonCosmonaut]

Assuming that a monarchist coup occurred in France after world war 1, which of the two pretender monarchs would secure power

This is for a timeline i’m doing with my friends, and I’m it Germany defeats France after ww1, so using that as context, which party would be more likely to seize power

You can use any means necessary, with the only inclusion that Germany defeats France in world war 1.

 

[Arlos]

Military defeat? A Bonaparte.

 

[Feunoyr]

In 1918, the "Action française" party was the only monarchist faction powerful enough to take the power. Maurras had partisans in all social classes and in the army, as well as the support of the Church; and he supported Philip, the Duke of Orleans, for the throne. Prince Victor Bonaparte, head of the imperial family, was an isolated man with few supporters. But, in my opinion, it is not impossible that a French Monck could have emerged from the army and used of it as a symbol to install his authority.

 

[TRH]

In 1918, the "Action française" party was the only monarchist faction powerful enough to take the power. Maurras had partisans in all social classes and in the army, as well as the support of the Church; and he supported Philip, the Duke of Orleans, for the throne. Prince Victor Bonaparte, head of the imperial family, was an isolated man with few supporters. But, in my opinion, it is not impossible that a French Monck could have emerged from the army and used of it as a symbol to install his authority.

I guess they could have imported additional Bonapartes from Maryland if they were desperate.

 

[Michel Van]

I don‘t know of there any Bonapartes Alive
but a King of Bourbon-Orleans line in Post ww1 would be quite interesting

alone the implementation in Spanish Civil war or relations to Italy

 

[connorCD]

To be frank, would France even want a Bonaparte on the throne after Napoleon III's failed kingship?

 

[TRH]

I don‘t know of there any Bonapartes Alive
but a King of Bourbon-Orleans line in Post ww1 would be quite interesting

alone the implementation in Spanish Civil war or relations to Italy

He was pretty old by 1918, but a Bonaparte served as Theodore Roosevelt’s Attorney General. He had no children, but still.

 

[Analytical Engine]

I don‘t know of there any Bonapartes Alive

They are still around.

 

[Arlos]

Yes the Bonaparte are still a thing(even today they are) yes, they had support, especially among the young, and yes, people would still want them if the Republic fucked a war like this.
Things is, both Bourbon and Bonaparte are forbidden from entering France.

 

[Modern Imperialism]

If Germany wins the war especially by taking Paris I could see them imposing a German friendly bourbon regime on France as part of the peace agreement. In exchange for this Germany let’s France keep majority of its colony but it also demilitarizes the French border with Germany and has a few soldiers stationed in France as part of the agreement. Germany helps Bourbon monarch stay in power and slowly becomes economically dominate over France so they become too dependent on Germany to pose any major threat.

 

[Lalli]

If Germany wins the war especially by taking Paris I could see them imposing a German friendly bourbon regime on France as part of the peace agreement. In exchange for this Germany let’s France keep majority of its colony but it also demilitarizes the French border with Germany and has a few soldiers stationed in France as part of the agreement. Germany helps Bourbon monarch stay in power and slowly becomes economically dominate over France so they become too dependent on Germany to pose any major threat.

Was there anymore any suitable Bourbon claimant left? Only real options I could see after WW1 for me are Orleans or Bonapartes.

 

[Deleted member 109224]

Action Francais were the only monarchists with popularity and they were pro-Orleanist so it would likely be them.


Post-WW2 I could see a Bonaparte Restoration considering how bold Napoleon VI's actions were during the war. The man assumed a fake name, joined the Foreign Legion, proceeded to then join the French resistance, and nearly died (being the only one of a 7-member patrol to survive a skirmish).

 

[Seandineen]

There was an alternative history where Napoleon vi is recruited by degualle to prevent the o.a.s. Ruckus over Algeria.

 

[Aisha Clan-Clan]

DeGaulle isn't an option?

 

[Lord_Vespasian]

To be frank, would France even want a Bonaparte on the throne after Napoleon III's failed kingship?

This is a good point. Napoleon III was actually pretty good for France in most things but not with Germany. If they feel they need someone to guide them to victory against the allemand then I'd doubt they'd want the guy who lost in 1870

 

[da Racontor]

DeGaulle isn't an option?

He was from a family who historically had ties to the Bourbon-Orleans, if I remember right, so if it was up to him probably them.

 

[Anneessens]

Things is, both Bourbon and Bonaparte are forbidden from entering France.

Was there anymore any suitable Bourbon claimant left?

Kinda, sorta, ...

Aside from the Orleans, a subbranch of the Bourbons, there were (and are) still members of the Bourbon family to this day, even under that name.

The main line of the Bourbons died out in 1883, but there's still lots of descendants from Philip V, Louis XIV's grandson who became king of Spain. Supporters of the Orleans claim that they are excluded from the succession to the French throne by the fact that Philip V assumed the Spanish throne, this renunciation of being codified by the treaties of Utrecht. This would mean that succession would devolve upon the next (and only other surviving) branch of the Capetian dynasty, the Orleans. However, a small portion of monarchists (who assumed the name of "legitimists") believe that such a renunciation would be contrary to the French fundamental laws and therefore support the heads of these branches.

During and after the First World War, their claimant was none other than the carlist pretender to the Spanish throne, don Jaime de Borbón, duque de Madrid aka "Jacques Ier, roi de France et de Navarre". He himself was mainly interested in his Spanish heritage, but he did assume the title of "duke of Anjou" (after the courtesy title of Philip V before he became Spanish king) and handed out the occasional French dynastic order.

However, this legitimism was a minority current without any political leverage. Which is testified by the fact that, while the Orleans and Bonaparte claimants were banned from entering French soil between 1886 en 1950, the French republican authorities didn't deem it necessary to apply this law to don Jaime, who died in his Paris appartment in the avenue Hoche in 1931.

Nowadays, I've got the impression that - at least among hardcore monarchists - the legitimists faction (now represented by noone other than the great-grandson of Francisco Franco) has overtaken the Orleans one in numbers. In part due to the controversies surrounding the Orleans family, partially because the older line is no longer handicapped by also being Spanish claimants, but I guess also due to the fact that monarchism has become so irrelevant that those remaining might as well support the most extremist theory.

 

[Arlos]

Kinda, sorta, ...

Aside from the Orleans, a subbranch of the Bourbons, there were (and are) still members of the Bourbon family to this day, even under that name.

The main line of the Bourbons died out in 1883, but there's still lots of descendants from Philip V, Louis XIV's grandson who became king of Spain. Supporters of the Orleans claim that they are excluded from the succession to the French throne by the fact that Philip V assumed the Spanish throne, this renunciation of being codified by the treaties of Utrecht. This would mean that succession would devolve upon the next (and only other surviving) branch of the Capetian dynasty, the Orleans. However, a small portion of monarchists (who assumed the name of "legitimists") believe that such a renunciation would be contrary to the French fundamental laws and therefore support the heads of these branches.

During and after the First World War, their claimant was none other than the carlist pretender to the Spanish throne, don Jaime de Borbón, duque de Madrid aka "Jacques Ier, roi de France et de Navarre". He himself was mainly interested in his Spanish heritage, but he did assume the title of "duke of Anjou" (after the courtesy title of Philip V before he became Spanish king) and handed out the occasional French dynastic order.

However, this legitimism was a minority current without any political leverage. Which is testified by the fact that, while the Orleans and Bonaparte claimants were banned from entering French soil between 1886 en 1950, the French republican authorities didn't deem it necessary to apply this law to don Jaime, who died in his Paris appartment in the avenue Hoche in 1931.

Nowadays, I've got the impression that - at least among hardcore monarchists - the legitimists faction (now represented by noone other than the great-grandson of Francisco Franco) has overtaken the Orleans one in numbers. In part due to the controversies surrounding the Orleans family, partially because the older line is no longer handicapped by also being Spanish claimants, but I guess also due to the fact that monarchism has become so irrelevant that those remaining might as well support the most extremist theory.

Eh, you’d be surprised, if you don’t look too closely you probably won’t see any monarchism, mostly because nobody talk about it and there is still a blackout about the Royal family in France, and really anything royale, but as a matter of fact my country is still quite monarchist, especially in rural area, it’s nowhere near enough to win any elections, especially as they are divided between claimant, but the numbers of supporters has been stable for awhile. Especially in that certain place in the north

 

[Anneessens]

Eh, you’d be surprised, if you don’t look too closely you probably won’t see any monarchism, mostly because nobody talk about it and there is still a blackout about the Royal family in France, and really anything royale, but as a matter of fact my country is still quite monarchist, especially in rural area, it’s nowhere near enough to win any elections, especially as they are divided between claimant, but the numbers of supporters has been stable for awhile. Especially in that certain place in the north

Which one? I don't get it. But I've got to admit that I'm not that familiar with the North of France - I've got a yearly tradition of visiting Paris (spring) and the Dunkirk region (summer), but there might as well be dragons between Saint-Omer and the 18th arrondissement for all I know.

I've always associated monarchism with the Vendée and Brittany, of course. "Le fédéralisme et la superstition parlent bas-breton" - does it now speak ch'ti as well?

 

[Max Sinister]

I think the Legit-Orleans-Bonaparte split has ensured that France will never ever become a monarchy again, unless one of them has enough power of his own to return Napoleon III style. But I don't think that "Let's return to monarchy!" alone will cut this.