Pre­tenders and con­tenders have long been a part of human his­to­ry, par­tic­u­lar­ly when it comes to claims of thrones or posi­tions of pow­er. Dur­ing Russia’s “Time of Trou­bles,” which last­ed from 1598 to 1613, at least three men known as “False Dmit­ry” claimed the Russ­ian throne, with the first briefly suc­ceed­ing in tak­ing it. Such events were not iso­lat­ed, as through­out his­to­ry, many indi­vid­u­als have assert­ed their right to ruler­ship, even with­out the for­mal back­ing or enti­tle­ment to do so. From ancient times to mod­ern days, these self-pro­claimed rulers, whether dri­ven by ambi­tion or des­per­a­tion, have sparked con­flict and intrigue, often lead­ing to pow­er strug­gles with­in king­doms or empires. These claims per­sist not just in his­to­ry, but also con­tin­ue to shape mod­ern dis­cus­sions sur­round­ing roy­al legit­i­ma­cy and polit­i­cal author­i­ty.

One con­tem­po­rary exam­ple of this phe­nom­e­non is Louis Alphonse de Bour­bon, who lives a life of lux­u­ry as a mem­ber of the Span­ish nobil­i­ty but also claims to be the right­ful King of France, Louis XX. His claim to the throne, despite France’s tran­si­tion to a repub­lic cen­turies ago, is part of a wider pat­tern where indi­vid­u­als, often with noble blood, con­tin­ue to assert their right to long-dis­solved monar­chies. Sim­i­lar­ly, in Brazil, Pedro Car­los main­tains his claim to the now-abol­ished Brazil­ian throne, high­light­ing the endur­ing appeal of roy­al­ty and the desire to pre­serve a sym­bol­ic con­nec­tion to the country’s past monar­chy. These mod­ern pre­tenders, much like their his­tor­i­cal coun­ter­parts, per­pet­u­ate debates about the legit­i­ma­cy of inher­it­ed pow­er, even when the insti­tu­tions they aim to lead no longer exist in the same form. Their per­sis­tence in assert­ing these claims speaks to the endur­ing pow­er of tra­di­tion and the ongo­ing allure of roy­al titles, despite chang­ing polit­i­cal land­scapes.

His­tor­i­cal­ly, pre­tenders have not only emerged in estab­lished monar­chies but also in times of polit­i­cal insta­bil­i­ty, as seen dur­ing the cri­sis of the Roman Empire in the 3rd cen­tu­ry. The “His­to­ria Augus­ta” doc­u­ments sev­er­al instances where indi­vid­u­als sought to claim pow­er dur­ing this peri­od of tur­moil. This insta­bil­i­ty led to numer­ous pre­tenders, each hop­ing to seize the throne in a time of weak impe­r­i­al author­i­ty. This cri­sis peri­od saw the rise of indi­vid­u­als who, despite hav­ing no legit­i­mate claim to the empire, attempt­ed to fill the vac­u­um left by a fal­ter­ing gov­ern­ment. The desire for pow­er in such times often led to short-lived reigns, reflect­ing the frag­ile nature of polit­i­cal legit­i­ma­cy dur­ing peri­ods of insta­bil­i­ty. Sim­i­lar­ly, the sto­ry of Mary Will­cocks, an Eng­lish­woman who fooled the res­i­dents of Almonds­bury into believ­ing she was the Princess of Cara­boo, exem­pli­fies how imposters, with no roy­al her­itage, could cre­ate entire sto­ries around false iden­ti­ties.

The role of reli­gion in the rise of pre­tenders can be seen in the phe­nom­e­non of “antipopes” dur­ing the Mid­dle Ages. These indi­vid­u­als claimed the papa­cy, despite not being elect­ed by the Col­lege of Car­di­nals, result­ing in dis­putes over reli­gious lead­er­ship. The strug­gle for reli­gious author­i­ty dur­ing this peri­od shows the broad­er impli­ca­tions of false claims, extend­ing beyond sec­u­lar pol­i­tics into spir­i­tu­al domains. In Rus­sia, after the trag­ic exe­cu­tion of the Romanov fam­i­ly in 1918, claims to the Russ­ian throne con­tin­ued, with Maria Vladimirov­na, a descen­dant of the Romanovs, assert­ing her claim to the lega­cy of Russia’s monar­chy. Such claims high­light the endur­ing appeal of lost pow­er and the deep ties between monar­chy and nation­al iden­ti­ty. Even after the fall of an empire or dynasty, those con­nect­ed to it by blood often seek to regain or pre­serve what was lost, embody­ing the his­tor­i­cal, emo­tion­al, and cul­tur­al sig­nif­i­cance of their claimed lega­cy.

Through­out his­to­ry, rival dynas­ties have also posed sig­nif­i­cant chal­lenges to estab­lished author­i­ty. In CE 273, Fir­mus led a brief rebel­lion against Emper­or Aure­lian, embody­ing the attempts to seize pow­er that fre­quent­ly occurred dur­ing times of uncer­tain­ty. These inter­nal chal­lenges often reflect the deeply ingrained desire for pow­er with­in noble or roy­al fam­i­lies, where the legit­i­ma­cy of a ruler can be con­test­ed by anoth­er mem­ber of the same fam­i­ly. The relo­ca­tion of the papa­cy to Avi­gnon in the 14th cen­tu­ry and the rise of Napoleon III in France, who suc­cess­ful­ly claimed the French throne, are exam­ples of how con­test­ed legit­i­ma­cy can lead to sig­nif­i­cant shifts in pow­er. Whether through rebel­lion, civ­il unrest, or exter­nal forces, the pur­suit of pow­er by con­tenders and pre­tenders alike demon­strates the com­plex­i­ties of polit­i­cal dynam­ics and the lengths to which indi­vid­u­als will go to claim or main­tain author­i­ty.

Pre­tenders, while often of noble or roy­al descent, dif­fer from imposters, who typ­i­cal­ly have no legit­i­mate claim to the throne or posi­tion. Despite con­clu­sive DNA evi­dence dis­prov­ing the sur­vival of any Romanovs after 1918, sev­er­al women have con­tin­ued to claim they are Anas­ta­sia Romanov, one of the most famous vic­tims of the Russ­ian Rev­o­lu­tion. These endur­ing claims, even when sci­en­tif­i­cal­ly refut­ed, reflect the deeply root­ed fas­ci­na­tion with roy­al blood­lines and the sym­bol­ic impor­tance of lega­cy. The chap­ter empha­sizes the last­ing impact of pre­tenders and con­tenders on polit­i­cal and social land­scapes, illus­trat­ing that the desire for pow­er and recog­ni­tion tran­scends time. These claims, whether ground­ed in fact or dri­ven by myth, con­tin­ue to shape the way we view monar­chy, author­i­ty, and the pur­suit of pow­er in both his­tor­i­cal and mod­ern con­texts.