13

After the Hundred Years War (or "wars") the English had been wiped off France, but English monarchs kept using their official title "King of France". As I understand, this was to legalize their claims to the French throne and show they are still valid.

This Wikipedia page shows the English/Scottish rulers that used the title "King of France".

The mentioned article says also:

During the peace negotiations at the Conference of Lille, lasting from July to November 1797, the French delegates demanded that the King of Great Britain abandon the title of King of France as a condition of peace.

Officially, this happened in 1800:

In 1800, the Act of Union joined the Kingdom of Great Britain with the Kingdom of Ireland to a new United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. George III chose this opportunity to drop his claim to the now defunct French throne, whereupon the fleurs de lis, part of the coat of arms of all claimant Kings of France since the time of Edward III, were also removed from the British royal arms. Britain recognised the French Republic by the Treaty of Amiens of 1802.

The article says also, that English claims were in fact only prestigious:

The seven monarchs of this period [1603-1707] continued to use the style King/Queen of France, though their claim was merely nominal. None of them was willing to engage in military campaigns for France against the actual Kings of France Henry IV, Louis XIII and Louis XIV of France. Indeed, Charles I married a sister of Louis XIII, and his son Charles II spent much of his exile during the Interregnum in France (at which time, even if not formally abandoning his claim for its throne, he certainly did not emphasise it). (...)

[The Kingdom of Great Britain] had four Monarchs until 1801. They also styled themselves Queen/King of France; however, none of them actually questioned the rights of Louis XIV and his successors Louis XV, Louis XVI, Louis XVII and Louis XVIII

Even if using the title "King of France" was only a part of some tradition, this should have been some problem for the French as after the Revolution they demanded to cancel using it.

Of course it is clear that France and England (or Great Britain or United Kingdom) not always had good relations, but I understand that France somehow accepted this. Did she beg/ask/demand the English to cease it?

I understand that when two kings met on some occasion (or an ambassador was introduced to a king) there was confusing presentation of two "kings of France".

How did other countries take/recognise this title (the largest/most important, like Spain, Holy Roman Empire, Austria, Poland/Lithuania, the Pope, Ottoman Empire maybe)?

Was it just taken "it's just a children's play, let the English perform it, if it's fun for them"?

Has anyone tried to clear this situation?

  • 2
    I believe that they also kept the title "Defender of the Faith" after they left the faith. Titles for monarchs are understood to be ceremonial and have no relevance beyond the capability of the holder to project power. Take for example, Emperor Norton – Mark C. Wallace Apr 24 '15 at 15:04
  • 4
    @MarkC.Wallace Another example of that is Philip VI, current King of Spain, who among other things is still King of Jerusalem and Corsica and Count of Habsburg without that making him enter conflict with neither Israel, France or Austria; but anyway, back in a time where monarchy was the most common form of government, any of those titles could be brought up if the occasion to take advantage of them rose. – JMVanPelt Apr 24 '15 at 15:55
  • 2
    What exactly is your question? – Tyler Durden Apr 24 '15 at 19:23
  • 2
    @TylerDurden The question is divided in three parts: "Did France beg/ask/demand the English to cease it?", "How did other countries take/recognise this title?" and "Has anyone tried to clear this situation?" (ie. declare that Louis the n-th is the only king of France and George the m-th is not). (I believe it is possible to answer the three parts as one) – Voitcus Apr 24 '15 at 19:35
  • 4
    @MarkC.Wallace "I believe that they also kept the title "Defender of the Faith" after they left the faith." The title isn't "Defender of the Catholic Faith". – Acccumulation Jun 12 '18 at 15:26
12

How did other countries take/recognise this title (the largest/most important, like Spain, Holy Roman Empire, Austria, Poland/Lithuania, the Pope, Ottoman Empire maybe)?

Was it just taken "it's just a children's play, let the English perform it, if it's fun for them"?

All the other monarchs did the same thing.

The kings of France and Spain both used the title of King of Navarre.

At one point Emperor Charles VI claimed so many kingdoms that by coincidence two which were hundreds of miles apart had the same name in English - Galicia in Spain and Galicia in Poland - Lithuania.

The king of the Spanish kingdoms was king of both Sicilies because his ancestors acquired both rival kingdoms of Sicily. And other rulers also used the title King of Sicily.

The King of Denmark and Norway, and the King of Sweden both used the titles of King of the Goths and of the Wends.

The king of Hungary and the Tsar of Russia both listed Bulgaria among their titles, and in the 19th century the king of Bulgaria also used the title.

Similarly, there was period when the King of Hungary and the king of Serbia both used the title king of Serbia.

And several monarchs at at a time claimed the title of King of Jerusalem.

  • Nice, thank you. So it means that French kings had no problem with their English equivalents? – Voitcus Jul 2 '15 at 7:51
  • 1
    To add confusion to the mix, the British monarchy still retains some sort of authority in the Channel Islands which are/were nominally part of the Duchy of Normandy. – Conrad Turner Jul 2 '15 at 10:11
-1

If I remember correctly, when it was first claimed (to legitimize the Hundred year war), France neighbor were quite happy with the fact, the Holy Roman Empire sided with the "legitimate" king of France (at first, his son famously fought at Crécy). Years later, Charles V of Hapsburg, sided with François I to make the English crown abdicate the french claim because heresy and stuff like that(he was unsuccessful, and despised François I, he just hated the Tudor king much more, but that is another story.).

Austria, Poland/Lithuania and the Ottoman Empire didn't really care, but do note that the Ottoman Empire was an ally of the French crown during Louis XIV's reign, they might have dismissed the validity of the English claim while allied.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.