Making him how distant a family member of the Windsors?
Just following male lines: from Simeon to Francis, Duke of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld is 5 generations back. From Elizabeth II to Francis is 6 generations. 3rd cousins, once removed?
Someone asked about Kings of Spain’s claim to the French Throne. This reminded me of Carlism (no relation to former King Carlos). Reading the Wikipedia article on it is yet another example of the extent people will waste time (centuries!) arguing over claims to a throne.
The title “King of Jerusalem” used to be claimed by a bunch of folk, it was bought and sold regularly. None of whom actually ruled over Jerusalem since the Crusaders got kicked out.
BTW, this guy is the real 3rd in line to the British throne. Not that so-called “Prince” George Windsor.
One of the provisions of the Treaty of Utrecht was that the thrones of Spain and France would forever remain separate; Philip V of Spain, born a prince of France, renounced for himself and his descendants any claim to the French throne. (It was part of the price of settling the War of the Spanish Succession.)
The present Duke of Anjou (above mentioned) claims the French throne on the basis that Philip V’s renunciation of France was void as contrary to French monarchical law, with the secondary argument othat he has no claim to the Spanish one, his grandfather having renounced Spanish claims in the 1930s, thus not violating the Treaty of Utrecht. Anjou descends from the second son of Alfonso XIII of Spain; the first son has no living descendants, the third was stillborn, and the fourth was Juan Carlos’s father. Juan Carlos certainly COULD claim the French throne if he wanted, but Utrecht and Anjou’s genealogical seniority would seem to be impediments to any such claim (which he hasn’t made) being widely accepted.
The cadet branch that became the Spanish Bourbons divested of French succession in 1714 as part of the treaty to end the War of Spanish Succession, this to try to forestall a return of the same situation that provoked it, namely the fear that in a succession crisis the Spanish and non-Spanish lines of a House (Austrian Hapsburgs before 1700, French Bourbons after 1700) could re-merge creating a mega-empire.
As it was it was a very close thing. By a series of dynastic accidents the French senior line was wittled down to the single youngest claimant - the future Louis XV. He came close to dieing of disease ( measles or smallpox ) as a young child at the same time as his older brother, mother and father.
If he had perished it is almost a dead certainty Philip V of Spain would have abrogated the agreements and claimed the throne in absense of another direct heir, starting another round of wars. Even partition between Philip’s sons would have been complicated, as they kept dieing without heirs themselves succeeding each other one after another - from Louis I ( d. 1724 ) to Ferdinand VI ( d. 1759 ) to Charles III ( d. 1788 ). It would have been an unbelievable mess.
There are enough *real *Bonapartists today for there to be splitters? :eek:
Thanks for some enlightening information, friends.
Whatever you do, don’t ask about the People’s Judean Front. Splitists indeed. 
Not exactly. It depends mostly on whether or not the renunciation to the French throne of Philip V and his descendants was legitimate or not. The fundamental laws of the kingdom normally prevented a monarch from changing the order of succession, making this renunciation void. If you follow this line of reasoning, then Louis Alphonse is the heir. If you think the renunciation is valid, then it’s Henri.
Indeed, you could just say that Louis-Philippe was the last king of France, so the legitimate heir should be his descendant Henri and the hell with Alphonse. But, for some reason, this argument isn’t generally used in this dispute (maybe because following this reasoning someone could say, hmm, wait, wasn’t Napoleon the last French monarch, so the throne should go to a Bonaparte???).
Some also argue that Alphonse cannot claim the throne because he and his forebears is/were Spanish citizens. It so happens that French Capetian kings were all French (contrarily to British monarchs, for instance) but it doesn’t necessarily mean that a foreigner can’t be heir.
No, because it the absence of male children the Spanish throne could be inherited by a woman (like in the UK) while the Salic law didn’t allow women to inherit the throne or to pass the claim to their male descendants (issue settled by the precedent called “one hundred years war”).
The Spanish throne went to a woman, and Juan Carlos is her remote heir. But the claim to the French throne passed to the closest male relative instead, and Alphonse is this man heir.
In fact, there was until not so long ago (one or two decades) a thriving Bonapartist party in Corsica, whose representants regularly won local elections. It seems it has recently withered away.
Also, you should know that anyway, the smaller a faction is, the most likely it is to split over trivial issues. It seems to hold true for politics and religion alike. There was a saying going like : “what are two trotskyists?” “A party”. “What are three trotskyist?” “A split”.
Agreed that “rightful monarch” is a pretty loaded term.
The question is rather similar to asking who is the rightful monarch of the United States. 
There’s no debate, but Norton died without issue.
While Elizabeth II has plenty of descendants available to replace her if she ever dies, it may be interesting to note that about half of England’s Kings were not descended from their immediate predecessor. There were four consecutive Monarchs — Jane of Nine Days, Mary the Bloody, Elizabeth the Virgin, and James VI the First — none of whom was descended from his/her immediate predecessor.
Trivia Question: Henry VIII had three children who became English Monarch. What other descendant of Henry VIII also reigned over England?
[SPOILER]The present Monarch, via this descent:
Henry VIII
Katherine Cary
Lettice Knollys
Robert Devereux
Frances Devereux
Jane Seymour
Charles Boyle
Richard Boyle (his wife Dorothy Savile was also a descendant of Lettice Knollys)
Charlotte Boyle
Dorothy Cavendish
William Cavendish-Bentinck
Charles Cavendish-Bentinck
Nina Cavendish-Bentinck
Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon
Elizabeth II
[/SPOILER]
Never acknowledged, though, and we can’t say for sure that Cary’s father was really Henry.
There’s testimony and much circumstantial evidence that Henry Cary was the King’s son. The King was already pursuing Anne Boleyn while her sister was pregnant with Henry so he could hardly acknowledge that Carey was his son — that would invalidate his proposed marriage to Anne on the same grounds (prior relationship with prospective spouse’s sibling) that he was using to annul his marriage to Catherine.
I believe that many experts in English genealogy are confident that the King sired one or both Carey children.
Duh- I should have remembered the conditions of the settlement of the War of the Spanish Succession.
That said, would any European nation care any more if the terms of that settlement were violated? The Sun King is long gone, monarchy itself is long gone. If a king came back to France, I have to think he’d be pretty well neutered.
I don’t see any likelihood of a return to monarchy in France, be it the Bourbons or the Bonapartes. But the monarchy today is of such little consequence in Europe that I doubt whether England would be inclined to enforce those terms if France (for some inexplicable reason) decided to let one of Louis XIV’s great, great, great great great great yadda yadda grand nephews become King.
Indeed. There are some who would say that this fellow Franz von Bayern - Wikipedia is the rightful king of England.
Juan Carlos is a direct male-line descendant of Philip V:
Philip V of Spain, 1683–1746
Charles III of Spain, 1716–1788
Charles IV of Spain, 1748–1819
Infante Francisco de Paula of Spain, 1794–1865
Francisco de Asis, King Consort of Spain, 1822–1902
Alfonso XII of Spain, 1857–1885
Alfonso XIII of Spain, 1886–1941
Don Juan de Borbón, Infante of Spain, Count of Barcelona, 1913–1993
Juan Carlos I of Spain
This descent diverges from the Spanish throne at Francisco de Paula, whose older brother became Ferdinand VII, and rejoins when Francisco’s son married his cousin and Ferdinand’s daughter Queen Isabella II (assuming that the King Consort actually fathered his wife’s kids, which admittedly has been the subject of intense speculation since the 1850s).
This is also the line of descent of Louis Alphonse, whose claim to the French throne depends on his descent from Alfonso XIII; Juan Carlos and Louis Alphonse’s father were first cousins. If Isabella II “breaks” Juan Carlos’s claim, then she also breaks Louis Alphonse’s.
Suppose the Orthodox jews and Hasidem in Israel had some kind of liturgical coup or Revolution, restoring rule by a Hebrew King…has anybody been monitoring a Davidic Lineage?