Resultado de búsqueda
Philippe of Lorraine (1643 – 8 December 1702), known as the Chevalier de Lorraine, was a French nobleman, descendant of the Dukes of Elbeuf, member of the House of Guise, cadet branch of the House of Lorraine. He was the renowned lover of Philippe I, Duke of Orléans, brother of Louis XIV.
Philippe de Lorraine, dit le « chevalier de Lorraine », né en 1643 et mort le 7 décembre 1702, fils cadet d'Henri de Lorraine, comte d'Harcourt et de Marguerite Philippe du Cambout, est un gentilhomme français, membre de la Maison de Lorraine, favori et mignon du duc d'Orléans, Monsieur, frère du roi Louis XIV.
- 1643, Lieu inconnu
Philippe of Lorraine (1643 – 8 December 1702), known as the Chevalier de Lorraine, was a French nobleman and member of the House of Guise, cadet of the Ducal House of Lorraine. He was the renowned lover of Philippe of France, Duke of Orléans, Monsieur, only brother of Louis XIV.
- 1643
- Alexandre, Chevalier de Beauvernois
- 8 December 1702, Paris, France
- Guise
Felipe nació en el año 1643, segundo hijo de Enrique de Lorena, conde de Harcourt, y de su esposa Margarita Felipa de Cambout. Su padre fue nombrado Conde de Harcourt en 1605 a la edad de cuatro años y era Grand Chevallier de France, un prestigioso cargo de las caballerizas reales.
26 de mar. de 2024 · Philippe-Emmanuel de Lorraine, duke de Mercoeur (born Sept. 9, 1558, Nomény, France—died Feb. 19, 1602, Nürnberg [Germany]) was a prince who led the resistance in Brittany against King Henry IV of France when that monarch was trying to consolidate his kingdom.
- The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica
Philippe of Lorraine (1643 – 8 December 1702), known as the Chevalier de Lorraine, was a French nobleman, descendant of the Dukes of Elbeuf, member of the House of Guise, cadet branch of the House of Lorraine. He was the renowned lover of Philippe I, Duke of Orléans, brother of Louis XIV.
2 de may. de 2021 · His intense romantic relationship with the Chevalier de Lorraine, his interest and expertise in make-up and fashion, and his successes as a military leader, are not treated as paradoxical, as some historians have problematically implied, but simply as parts of a whole.
