Talk:Prince of Louisianne

From IBWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Here be dragons, but be warned that I'm going to want to review all suggestions, (although I'll prolly approve anything that's plausible). Since this entire family line does not exist in OTL, it's really all up in the air. I'd like to see some royal shuffling, going down one line and having to jump back to a formerly junior line, etc. BoArthur 22:17, 7 November 2005 (PST)


Was the title Prince of Louisianne ever an actual administrative title? That is, during French rule, was the Prince of Louisianne the individual who ruled Louisianne? Nik 00:59, 9 November 2005 (PST)

*here* during the last years of the ancient regime the administration of the provinces was done by 3 peoples the bishop (religious affairs), the intendant (public service) and Governor (military). the 1st and 3rd were technicaly under the Intendant. Title linked to such provinces (ex: Duke of Anjou) were "apanage" which meant that they received revenue from it but were not actualy in control. One would assume this would be the case with the Prince too although due to the place being physicaly separated from the metropole, he might have gotten involved in some limited fashion.--Marc Pasquin 02:44, 9 November 2005 (PST)
The Governor, Jean-Baptiste Le Moyne de Bienville was elevated by Philippe II (per History of Louisianne). So he was Governor and Prince, basically the supreme ruler of Louisianne. BoArthur
That would have been considered a tad dangerous to have him cumulate positions. I don't mean that in a "cease and desist" kind of way, just that its not realy the way things were done in the kingdom of france. For one thing, the king would not have created a "sovereign" prince (as in monaco) but rather something more or less equivalent to a Prince(ss) of the Blood as his wife was.
As I described above, the link between title and land in france in the latter years of the ancient regime was not the same as you might find in the british system. The reason for the creation of apanage (where one earn from but do not own a land) was a way to avoid cutting up the kingdom. To give away to a minor prince a piece of land could mean, after a few generations, that the place would start to feel distinct or being given as dowery and eventualy separate. To have it being the equivalent of a rented appartment (which cannot be given away or modified) means that the province would stay within the kingdom.
To go back to the prince of louisianne, this would mean that after the king would have elevated him, Lemoyne would have received (as part of his dignity as prince) a "pension" from the land linked to his title (i.e. louisianna). The post of governor would then have been filed by someone else. --Marc Pasquin 17:17, 9 November 2005 (PST)
Personal tools