The Forums of Glennain

Full Version: State Funeral for Louis XVII
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Wednesday, June 9, 2004 Posted: 9:14 AM EDT (1314 GMT)



A carved jar with what is believed to be the heart of Louis XVII next to a crown in France's royal crypt prior to burial.




SAINT-DENIS, France (AP) -- France's royalists staged a pageant-filled funeral Tuesday for a tiny, rock-hard relic that they hailed as the heart of Louis XVII, who died at age 10 in a filthy revolutionary prison.

A hearse brimming with lilies -- the symbol of the French crown -- delivered a crystal vase containing the heart to the Saint-Denis Basilica. There, it was placed in a royal crypt containing the remains of Louis XVII's parents, Marie-Antoinette and Louis XVI.

After two centuries of mystery surrounding the boy's fate, DNA tests have convinced many historians that the relic passed secretly from person to person was truly the royal heart.

A faction of royalists -- who want to turn back the clock and restore France's monarchy -- seized on the cutting-edge tests to press the government to allow the funeral at the Gothic basilica north of Paris, the resting place of France's kings.

Trumpets sounded and incense wafted in the air as a small boy marched up the aisle with the vase draped by a purple veil. Outside, a crowd of royal-watchers followed the Mass on a huge screen.

Afterward, cries of "Long live the king!" greeted the Duke of Anjou, Louis-Alphonse de Bourbon, one of several pretenders to France's throne. To this day, the Bourbons dispute the rights of succession with the Orleans dynasty that followed.

The Mass recognizing the royal heart attempted to close 209 years of legend and uncertainty about Louis XVII's death. Yet some skeptics insist that the mystery is still unresolved.

Historian Philippe Delorme, who wrote a book about Louis XVII and organized the genetic tests, lists the facts of the boy's brief but grim life as follows:

Louis XVII lost his parents to the guillotine in 1793. He was locked in Paris' Temple prison for three years. The boy was brainwashed, with captors forcing him to sing revolutionary songs and curse his mother's memory. He also spent months alone in a darkened tower, with nobody to wash him or clean his cell.

At Tuesday's requiem Mass, Cardinal Jean Honore compared the ill-fated boy to today's abused children.

"The fragility of a child ... imposes absolute respect in our world today," he said.

When Louis XVII finally died of tuberculosis in 1795, rumors instantly circulated that the royal heir had been smuggled to safety, and a commoner had died in his place.

The small body was dumped in a common grave -- but first, a doctor secretly carved out the heart, in keeping with a royal tradition. He spirited it away in a handkerchief and kept it as a souvenir, Delorme said. The heart passed from person to person until it was returned to France in 1975.

The DNA tests were carried out in 2000, establishing a genetic link with a strand of Marie-Antoinette's hair.

But still, some people continue to insist that the true heir was one of the many people who came forward in the 19th century -- in places as far-flung as the Seychelles and Wisconsin -- claiming to be the lost boy.

One was Charles-Guillaume Naundorff, a mysterious man with German papers who turned up in the early 19th century. One of his descendants is among those who challenged the Saint-Denis funeral.

Some mourners Tuesday said they understood why some people preferred the happier ending to Louis XVII's story -- escape versus death.

"But DNA is sufficient proof that this heart is truly that of the right child," said Elisabeth Bramwell, a descendent of a noble French family who wore black lace and a large cross around her neck.

While Louis XVII's story reached its epilogue Tuesday, one scientist who probed the heart for DNA spoke of plans to investigate another mysterious historical figure.

Jean-Jacques Cassiman of Belgium's Louvain University told VRT television about his newest task: Testing the DNA of Napoleon Bonaparte to make sure the body entombed in Paris is the real thing.
For those of you who are not up on your French history, Louis XVII never reigned, of course, having died in prison. He was succeeded by the younger brother of Louis XVI, Louis Stanislas Xavier who became Louis XVIII.

Louis was gout stricken and feeble and was never crowned on account of his poor physical health. He enjoyed a successful reign and died peacefully at Versailles. As Louis was childless, he was succeeded by his younger brother, the Comte d'Artois, who became King Charles X.

Charles' efforts to restore absolutism backfired upon him and another revolution--the July Revolution--ensued, deposing the last Bourbon King of France. Louis Philippe d'Orleans succeeded him--illegitimately, according to succession laws--and was, himself, deposed as he became more autocratic later in his reign. He was the last reigning king of France (or "King of the French" as he was styled).

Today, the Count of Paris claims to be the legitimate modern day heir to Louis-Philippe, his Orleanist supporters referring to him as "King Henri". The "legitimist" Bourbon-line faction supports the young Duke of Anjou, calling him "King Louis XX".
I am currently in Paris: I was in Rouen on the 9th I believe so I did not get to see the funeral; however; i did see several signs that said vive le roi and several people flew the old fluer de lis spqngled bqnner

au revoir for now

J
Ok, to try to spark some discussion....

What does everyone think about the Legitimiste vs. Orleaniste claims?

I personally think that the Legitimiste have the better claim...
I honestly don't know enough about this to speak about it. The Legitimist heir is Louis Alfonse or LOUIS XX right? The Orleanist claimant is Henri the Count of Paris, right? That is about all I know.
I'm partial to the Legitimistes because I despise the Orleans. Louis Egalite was a treacherous regicidal opportunist and his son had no business ascending the French throne. The current Count of Paris is a ridiculous man who tries too hard to assert his claim: he's gone to court twice trying to force the government to recognize him as titular King of France. Naturally, the courts told him to get a life, as if the French Republic were going to declare a titular king.

The Bourbon legitimist claimant, the Duke of Anjou, is a young banker who seems to enjoy more popular support amongst monarchists and handles himself with grace and dignity. He doesn't crudely assert his own claim, but rather allows others to make his case for him. I really don't think he has any interest in sitting on a restored French throne whatsoever. His mature, removed and realistic approach, however, makes him the more desirable candidate for king from the start.
I also agree that Louis Alfonse, the Duke of Anjou would make a better king. He seems more dignified without being stuck up. The Count of Paris seems to be very stuck up. The late Countess of Paris seems like she could have been a very nice woman, she was of Brazilian Imperial heritage I believe.
I think I would make the better king. I'm very chivalrous and gentlemanly and I ain't got no damn Brazilian chicks hangin' on me.
I agree and I am not just saying that because the Guliotine is being sharpened... You are truly a noble and just King... and when I grow up I want to be just like you... smilie

Okay, done with the brown nosing can I have some brazilian chicks?
I also support the Legitimiste claim.

Among other things, the Count of Paris deciding to call himself Duc de France, I find in rather bad taste...

For Crown Prince Justin, and others not familiar with the genesis of the Legitimiste/Orleaniste claims, here's a brief intro (if I make any errors, I'm sure Lord Marchmain will correct me smilie )

The Legitimistes are descended from Philippe, Duke of Anjou, grandson of Louis XIV. Philippe renounced his right to the French throne in order to be made King of Spain as Felipe V.

The Orleanistes are descended from Louis-Philippe I, made King of the French by the parliament after they forced out his cousin and rightful King, Charles X. They are descended from Philippe, Duke of Orleans, brother of Louis XIV.

The Orleanistes claim that the renunciation of Philippe/Felipe is legal and prevents the accession of his descendants as rightful Kings of France, and that they are the next in line. Also, that they are descended from the most recent King of France makes them the rightful claimants.

However, the general understanding of experts is that not only did the parliament have no right to depose the rightful king and install Louis-Philippe, but also that French law regarding succession makes no provision for renunciation.

The French law has always been that the senior male line descendant of Hugh Capet is the rightful King of France. Without question, that would be Luis Alfonso (Louis XX)
Reference URL's