November 11, 1748: Birth of King Carlos IV of Spain.

Tags

Age of Enlightenment, House of Bourbon, King Carlos III of Spain, King Carlos IV of Spain, King Felipe V of Spain, King Louis XV of France, King Louis XVI of France, Kingdom of Spain, Manuel de Godoy, Maria Louisa of Parma, Napoleon Bonaparte, Queen Marie Antoinette, Spanish Empire

From the Emperor’s Desk: Due to technological difficulties I was unable to post this yesterday.

Carlos IV (November 11, 1748 – January 20, 1819) was King of Spain and the Spanish Empire from 14 December 14, 1788, until his abdication on March 19, 1808.

The Spain inherited by Carlos IV gave few indications of instability, but during his reign, Spain entered a series of disadvantageous alliances and his regime constantly sought cash to deal with the exigencies of war. He detested his son and heir Fernando, who led the unsuccessful El Escorial Conspiracy and later forced Carlos’s abdication after the Tumult of Aranjuez in March 1808, along with the ouster of his widely hated first minister Manuel de Godoy.

Summoned to Bayonne by Napoleon Bonaparte, who forced Fernando VII to abdicate, Carlos IV also abdicated, paving the way for Napoleon to place his older brother Joseph Bonaparte on the throne of Spain. The reign of Carlos IV turned out to be a major turning point in Spanish history.

Early life

Carlos was the second son of Carlos III and his wife, Maria Amalia of Saxony. He was born in Naples (November 11, 1748), while his father was King of Naples and Sicily. His elder brother, Don Felipe, was passed over for both thrones, due to his learning disabilities and epilepsy.

In Naples and Sicily, Carlos was referred to as the Prince of Taranto. He was called El Cazador (meaning “the Hunter”), due to his preference for sport and hunting, rather than dealing with affairs of the state. Carlos was considered by many to have been amiable, but simple-minded. In 1788, Carlos III died and Carlos IV succeeded to the throne, and ruled for the next two decades.

Even though he had a profound belief in the sanctity of the monarchy, and kept up the appearance of an absolute, powerful king Carlos IV never took more than a passive part in his own government. The affairs of government were left to his wife, Maria Luisa, and the man he appointed first minister, Manuel de Godoy.

Carlos occupied himself with hunting in the period that saw the outbreak of the French Revolution, the executions of his Bourbon relative Louis XVI of France and his queen, Marie Antoinette, and the rise of Napoleon Bonaparte. Ideas of the Age of Enlightenment had come to Spain with the accession of the first Spanish Bourbon, Felipe V.

Carlos IV’s father Carlos III had pursued an active policy of reform that sought to reinvigorate Spain politically and economically and make the Spanish Empire more closely an appendage of the metropole. Carlos III was an active, working monarch with experienced first ministers to help reach decisions. Carlos IV by contrast was a do-nothing king, with a domineering wife and an inexperienced but ambitious first minister, Godoy.

Well-meaning and pious, Carlos IV floundered in a series of international crises beyond his capacity to handle. He was painted by Francisco Goya in a number of official court portraits, which numerous art critics have seen as satires on the King’s stout vacuity.

Riots, and a popular revolt at the winter palace Aranjuez, in 1808 forced the king to abdicate on March 19, in favor of his son. Fernando took the throne as Fernando VII, but was mistrusted by Napoleon, who had 100,000 soldiers stationed in Spain by that time due to the ongoing War of the Third Coalition.

Marriage and children

Carlos IV married his first cousin Infanta Maria Louisa of Parma, the daughter of Philip, Duke of Parma, in 1765. The couple had fourteen children, six of whom survived into adulthood:

Infanta Maria Luisa of Parma (1751 – 1819) was Queen consort of Spain from 1788 to 1808 leading up to the Peninsular War. She was the youngest daughter of Philip, Duke of Parma, the fourth son of Felipe V of Spain and Louise Élisabeth of France, the eldest daughter of King Louis XV. In 1765 she married Carlos, Prince of Asturias who ascended the throne in 1788 and thus became queen.

Maria Luisa’s father, Philip (1720 – 1765) was Infante of Spain by birth, and Duke of Parma from 1748 to 1765. Born at the Royal Alcazar in Madrid as Felipe de Borbón y Farnesio, he was the third child and second son of Felipe V of Spain and his wife, Elisabeth Farnese. He founded the House of Bourbon-Parma, a cadet line of the Spanish branch of the Bourbon dynasty. He was a son-in-law of Louis XV.

Maria Luisa’s relationship with Manuel Godoy and influence over the King made her unpopular among the people and aristocrats. In total, Maria Luisa had twenty-four pregnancies of which fourteen children were born and ten miscarried.

She was rivals with the Duchess of Alba and the Duchess of Osuna attracting popular attention. The death of her daughter-in-law Princess Maria Antonia of Naples and Sicily, whom she disliked, was said to be the poisoning by the queen. When Carlos IV abdicated in 1808 he was accompanied by Maria Luisa.

Following Napoleon’s deposing of the Bourbon dynasty, the ex-King Carlos IV, his wife, Maria Luisa and former Prime Minister Godoy were held captive in France first at the château de Compiègne and three years in Marseille (where a neighborhood was named after him).

After the collapse of the regime installed by Napoleon, Fernando VII was restored to the Spanish throne. The former Carlos IV drifted about Europe until 1812, when he finally settled in Rome, in the Palazzo Barberini. His wife died on January 2, 1819, followed shortly by Carlos IV who died on January 20, of the same year.

When Monarchs ruled.

Tags

2012. Parliament, Absolute Monarchy, Age of Enlightenment, Charlemagne, Classical Liberalism, Constitutional Monarchy, Edward I of England, Louis XIV of France and Navarre, William the Conqueror

When I began my interest in royalty I was at first solely concerned in learning their particular genealogies. As I delved into the history of each country I began to be interested in the reigns of each monarch. I learned how monarchies survived going from periods of absolute power to the constitutional form we have today. Somewhere in the process I became a monarchist myself. With all the political infighting that occurs among politicians I think it is beneficial to have a figurehead as the Head of State. A Head of State that is symbolic of the nation and is above the petty partisan politics of the day. I think there are many beneficial aspects of having a Head of State being politically impartial for that gives them the opportunity of serving all the people and not just members of a particular party.

I need to be honest though, I do miss the days when Monarchs actually ruled and held some power. It is one of the things I enjoy about reading the history of these countries that were or are monarchies. For me it is an issue of power. In life some people have power and some do not. It is fascinating to read how those that held power used that power. So I find that the days when monarchs actually held power to be fascinating. Those times are even more interesting when a larger-than-life figure such as when Charlemagne or William the Conqueror or Louis XIV held power. I am sure I am romanticizing things because I know life was not all puppies, rainbows and roses under these monarchs. Yet things were not always terrible for there were monarchs that held power that did good for their country.

I look at King Edward I of England (1272-1307) as a good example. Historians report that the king could be a frightening individual and that he had a reputation because of his intimidating fierce temper also with a domineering physical presences. There is an anecdotal story about when the Dean of St Paul’s, who desired to confront the king about his broad level of taxation, was so intimidated by the king that he collapsed and died instantly the moment he was brought into the King’s presence. That sounds crazy to our modern scientific minds but it could be plausible that the stress of meeting this intimidating King could lead to sudden cardiac arrest. There was also a report that when the Prince of Wales (future Edward II) petitioned and pressured his father to grant an earldom for his personal favorite and friend, Piers Gaveston, the King grew impatient with his sons demands and the King exploded in anger and purportedly tore out handfuls of his son’s hair!

Edward is also known for the establishment of the Model Parliament. Parliament gathered on a fairly regular basis during his reign. In 1295 the king brought about some significant changes. At this point in history the English Parliament contained the secular (the nobility) and ecclesiastical lords (Priests and Bishops). In 1295 Edward also summoned two knights from each county and two representatives from each borough. These two representatives from the boroughs planted the seed for what eventual lead to the development of the House of Commons. Although having commoners sit in Parliament was not exactly new, the precedent setting status of these commoners was the fact that they were given, by the king, authority (plena potestas) of their communities, to give assent to the decisions made in Parliament. No longer were these commoner representatives there to give a rubber stamp and to simply assent to decisions already made by the upper magnates, they now met in Parliament with the full authority nobility and ecclesiastical lords had. This structure eventually became the standardized formation for later Parliaments.

Edward I was a mixture of being a good king with some bad personality issues. Now I do support Classical Liberal ideals of the democratic principles that came of age during the Enlightenment period where we have a right to select those that rule over us. However, I do enjoy reading about these monarchs such as Edward I who did hold power and also, with his creation of a more egalitarian Parliament, demonstrated that many times they could be effective and efficient rulers. While it is best to now have the monarchs as being above partisan politics you really cannot blame a monarchist for missing the good old days when they held actual power.