I am sure Noel did not intend to offend! I think the whole question of "recognition" is a kind of red herring. The official position of the Spanish Crown is very clear regarding the titles of the Duke of Anjou, and no reigning royal family is going to contradict this. Back in the late 19th century and early 20th the Gotha included the senior line of the House of Bourbon, with the Carlist titles, but no reigning house recognised the Duke of Madrid officially as claimant to anywhere. Both Queen Victoria and George V refused the request of the Earl of Ashburnham to receive the Duke of Madrid, even coming simply as Prince Carlos or Prince Jacques de Bourbon. Austria had perfectly fine relations with Portugal, even though according Dom Miguel the royal titles he claimed and likewise for his family. I am sure that no heads of a reigning (or non-reigning) house could ever acknowledge "King Carlos Javier" of Spain (aka Prince Charles de Bourbon-Parma in the Netherlands nobility) but when he is invited, it is because he is a close family member or because he is also head of the Parma family - but no-one is calling for the restoration of the duchies of Parma and Piacenza. When the Duke of Aosta is invited to British royal events (because his mother was the sister of the Duchess of Kent) it is not a signal that HM the Queen recognises him in preference to Prince V-E. So when the Duke of Braganza invited Luis-Alfonso / Louis-Alphonse as "Duke of Anjou" that is a courtesy. Being invited does not mean "recognition" and more than not being invited means the opposite.
Of course, I am referring to the Justus Perthes Publication. I find your comment really offensive. But no surprise.
AFAIK, the GM does not belong to any reigning royal family. You said it is included in the GHdA. I did not say the opposite. But it is not listed in the section I of the Almanach de Gotha. The prestige and authority of the latter cannot be compared to the former.
When Manuel refers to the Almanach de Gotha , I am not sure whether he means the Justus Perthes publication which ceased in 1944 or the London publication which began in 1998.
The Perthes publication certainly had prestige and authority, but is Manuel suggesting that a similar prestige and authority, greater than the GHdA , is attached to the London publication? Certainly the London publication has been widely criticised.
Since the Perthes Almanach de Gotha ceased publication in 1944, it is the GHdA which has become the leading print publication in the area.
221