The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #381  
Old 02-26-2016, 11:56 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Kingdom, Heard and McDonald Islands
Posts: 4,160
We are in the same situation like in 1889 when King Carol I did not have children and Prince Ferdinand of Hohenzollern became Crown Prince. The Constitution of 1866 had had the same rules like that of 1923 but Crown Prince Ferdinand was not asked to convert.
It is not required any Prince of Hohenzollern to become Orthodox in order to inherit the Throne. The future Constitution will anyhow respect the freedom of conscience taking into account there is no official National Church in Romania like in 1866.

King Michael modified his proposed List different times in the last years.

The constitutional Line is very clear but I was just saying there are no polls regarding the future of the Royal Family after the King.
The Constitution of 1923 is the Constitution anolished illegally by the Communists in 1947 and it is certainly dear to all those that respect the democratical royal past of Romania.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #382  
Old 02-26-2016, 12:00 PM
Benjamin's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: San Francisco, United States
Posts: 1,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by eya View Post
It says that should be Orthodox? But then should not ignore the constitution. But I imagine that if the Hohenzollerns accept the throne that can simply be changed and their religion.

Indeed, the article in question does require that the Sovereign be of the Orthodox faith. This is why all of King Michael's children were raised Orthodox--for the additional reason that had a son been produced, and made the succession less complicated, it would have been necessary for him to be of the faith prescribed by the Constitution.

I agree with you eya that the Hohenzollerns would be required to convert if they desired to press a claim in Romania.
__________________

__________________
Sii forte.
Reply With Quote
  #383  
Old 02-26-2016, 12:00 PM
Cris M's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Niterói, Brazil
Posts: 847
Oh, how nice that you think a new Constitution must respect freedom of conscience, while it can completely ignore five women simply because they are women.
__________________
“If a thousand thrones I had, I would give a thousand thrones to get the slaves free in Brazil."

Princess Isabel (1846-1921), Princess Imperial and Regent of the Empire of Brazil, after she signed the Golden Law, in 1888, abolishing slavery in Brazil.
Reply With Quote
  #384  
Old 02-26-2016, 12:00 PM
Benjamin's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: San Francisco, United States
Posts: 1,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cris M View Post
Oh, how nice that you think a new Constitution must respect freedom of conscience, while it can completely ignore five women simply because they are women.

Hear, hear! 👏🏻
__________________
Sii forte.
Reply With Quote
  #385  
Old 02-26-2016, 12:05 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Kingdom, Heard and McDonald Islands
Posts: 4,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin View Post
Indeed, the article in question does require that the Sovereign be of the Orthodox faith. This is why all of King Michael's children were raised Orthodox--for the additional reason that had a son been produced, and made the succession less complicated, it would have been necessary for him to be of the faith prescribed by the Constitution.

I agree with you eya that the Hohenzollerns would be required to convert if they desired to press a claim in Romania.
We are in the same situation like of the Succession of Prince Ferdinand of Hohenzollern to King Carol I. Nobody asked him to convert and he remained a devout Catholic all his life and probably the most important of the Romanian Kings. Nobody is asking the Princes of Hohenzollern to convert now in order to succeed to the Romanian dynastic rights.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #386  
Old 02-26-2016, 01:13 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Gonzales, Louisiana, United States
Posts: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chubb Fuddler View Post
That's because you seem steadfastly determined not to look beyond the narrow and dismissive way you have misunderstood constitutional monarchy as a form of national government. You make sweeping generalisations about whinging and begging royals, without actually providing any evidence to support such accusations. King Michael, who first became king 89 years ago, is a living symbol of Romania's history. He has not begged for anything, and there is absolutely nothing pretentious or arrogant about this fine old gentleman who served the people of Romania as king. The only arrogance here has been the way you have totally refused to even consider that the Royal House of Romania has found a niche for itself within the Republic of Romania. As such, even as an historical institution, King Michael's successor as Head of the Royal House of Romania is a topic of interest to many people who join in this discussion.
No I have read about various situations involving royals and have my own thoughts and opinions about the subject. Banishing Nicholas because he fathered an out of wedlock child is arrogant and equates to begging his hopeful future subjects not to think his family is immoral. Pompous arrogance on his part and it is begging for his people not to think badly of his family so they can restored to the throne. When a person views a situation differently than you, maybe they have also given much thought to it and came to a different conclusion. I think my thoughts about Michael and his family sting some people because (maybe just maybe) it hits a raw nerve (=made you think about the situation from a different point of view and actually does make sense). I never try to change anybody's thoughts on any subject, when I post something I am only stating my thoughts and opinions. People are not narrow-minded just because they have a different opinion.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #387  
Old 02-26-2016, 01:59 PM
MAfan's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: N/A, Italy
Posts: 5,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory View Post
There is no poll regarding who the people consider as future Heir to the Throne.
What purpose would it serve? Doesn't your dear 1923 Constitution clearly says who the future Heir to the Throne should be?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #388  
Old 02-26-2016, 02:35 PM
LadyRohan's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Sweden, Slovenia
Posts: 440
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cris M View Post
Oh, how nice that you think a new Constitution must respect freedom of conscience, while it can completely ignore five women simply because they are women.
Hear, hear indeed!
__________________
"He who has never failed to reach perfection, has a right to be the harshest critic" - Queen Elizabeth II
Reply With Quote
  #389  
Old 02-26-2016, 02:42 PM
LadyRohan's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Sweden, Slovenia
Posts: 440
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotHRH View Post
No I have read about various situations involving royals and have my own thoughts and opinions about the subject. Banishing Nicholas because he fathered an out of wedlock child is arrogant and equates to begging his hopeful future subjects not to think his family is immoral. Pompous arrogance on his part and it is begging for his people not to think badly of his family so they can restored to the throne. When a person views a situation differently than you, maybe they have also given much thought to it and came to a different conclusion. I think my thoughts about Michael and his family sting some people because (maybe just maybe) it hits a raw nerve (=made you think about the situation from a different point of view and actually does make sense). I never try to change anybody's thoughts on any subject, when I post something I am only stating my thoughts and opinions. People are not narrow-minded just because they have a different opinion.
I'll just answer this quickly to make clear that your views touch no nerve on my part, that would make me re-think a position or change my mind on monarchies and royalty. They are however, very uninformed, generalized and tabloid, and show very little insight into what royalty is, what it symbolizes and how it functions in modern monarchies.

There are many facts behind monarchies, and royalty (some of which can be found in the monarchy vs. republic thread, and to trivialize and denegrate the effort most of them do for their countries, and people who want them to do the job they do, is not nerve-touching. It's just uninformed.

About Nicholas and King Michael, you may use the word arrogance again as much as you want. I am deeply disappointed at the decision that was taken, but we actually do not know the basis for it. We can speculate and hypothesize, but I recommend saving the strongest words for when there are facts on the table, and not just hyperbole.
__________________
"He who has never failed to reach perfection, has a right to be the harshest critic" - Queen Elizabeth II
Reply With Quote
  #390  
Old 02-26-2016, 02:51 PM
MAfan's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: N/A, Italy
Posts: 5,735
As reminded by a fellow Moderator only a few hour ago, this is NOT the republic vs. monarchy thread nor the place for such a discussion.
So please move on and return on topic.
Thanks.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #391  
Old 02-26-2016, 03:03 PM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 6,976
The constitution of 1923 doesn't exist any more. The last constitution of Romania is from 1991, as a republic. If a monarchy was to be reinstituted, a new constitution would have to be written as the 1923 no longer exists, it was replaced. I don't see why the new constitution would not allow for at the very least male preference, even if they don't want full equality.

I see these arguments that the Princesses who have kids don't live in Romania. Well either do the Hohenzollerns, they live in Germany. Do they speak Romanian? Are they involved in Romania in any way?

It just seems odd to me. Yes they are related to Carol I. But why would they go so far back, when there are descendents of the actual line? IMO it would be like if the Greeks restored their monarchy but instead of Constantine and his children they named Fred or Joachim as heir. The first king of Modern Greece was a Danish prince, Marge's sons are descended from his older brother just as the Hohenollerns are descended from Carol I's older brother.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #392  
Old 02-26-2016, 03:08 PM
Cris M's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Niterói, Brazil
Posts: 847
If Romania ever decide to restore the Monarchy during the King's lifetime, I'm sure he'll get his throne back, but certainly with the Crown Princess as Regent. I also believe Parliament will appoint Nicholas as the Crown Princess' heir, even if the King and the Crown Princess don't like the idea.

And I think the Crown Princess will put her nephew back in the line of succession, once she becames the Head of the Royal House. I may be wrong, but she seems to be more interested in a restoration than her father, and she surely knows her nephew is their only hope.
__________________
“If a thousand thrones I had, I would give a thousand thrones to get the slaves free in Brazil."

Princess Isabel (1846-1921), Princess Imperial and Regent of the Empire of Brazil, after she signed the Golden Law, in 1888, abolishing slavery in Brazil.
Reply With Quote
  #393  
Old 02-26-2016, 04:54 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Kingdom, Heard and McDonald Islands
Posts: 4,160
You are right when you say Mr Medfoth Mills was their only hope for popular support but they certainly chaged everything in august 2015.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #394  
Old 02-26-2016, 04:58 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Kingdom, Heard and McDonald Islands
Posts: 4,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
The constitution of 1923 doesn't exist any more. The last constitution of Romania is from 1991, as a republic. If a monarchy was to be reinstituted, a new constitution would have to be written as the 1923 no longer exists, it was replaced. I don't see why the new constitution would not allow for at the very least male preference, even if they don't want full equality.

I see these arguments that the Princesses who have kids don't live in Romania. Well either do the Hohenzollerns, they live in Germany. Do they speak Romanian? Are they involved in Romania in any way?

It just seems odd to me. Yes they are related to Carol I. But why would they go so far back, when there are descendents of the actual line? IMO it would be like if the Greeks restored their monarchy but instead of Constantine and his children they named Fred or Joachim as heir. The first king of Modern Greece was a Danish prince, Marge's sons are descended from his older brother just as the Hohenollerns are descended from Carol I's older brother.
The Succession respects the Constitution that was in place when Monarchy was abolished as in many other cases in Europe. If Monarchy will be restored the Hohenzollerns would be asked to reign. If they refuse it could be another Royal Family.
It is true the Hohenzollerns do not live in Romania but they have the dynastic rights.
The descendance of the King have only two grandaughters " in Line" that have nothing to do with Romania so nobody would choose them.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #395  
Old 02-26-2016, 05:02 PM
Cris M's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Niterói, Brazil
Posts: 847
Instead of choosing one the last King's descendants, Romania would prefer a German Prince "that has nothing to do with Romania" as the new King.

Strong logic.
__________________
“If a thousand thrones I had, I would give a thousand thrones to get the slaves free in Brazil."

Princess Isabel (1846-1921), Princess Imperial and Regent of the Empire of Brazil, after she signed the Golden Law, in 1888, abolishing slavery in Brazil.
Reply With Quote
  #396  
Old 02-26-2016, 05:13 PM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 7,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cris M View Post
Instead of choosing one the last King's descendants, Romania would prefer a German Prince "that has nothing to do with Romania" as the new King.

Strong logic.
Have miss Karina Medforth-Mills from Newcastle-upon-Tyne and mademoiselle Elisabeth Biarneix from Paris anything to do with Romania?

On itself it does not matter where someone comes from, we know stories of South-Africans or US citizens becoming a Peer because they happened to be the most close Heir male of the body of the last Peer.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #397  
Old 02-26-2016, 05:18 PM
Cris M's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Niterói, Brazil
Posts: 847
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
Have miss Karina Medforth-Mills from Newcastle-upon-Tyne and mademoiselle Elisabeth Biarneix from Paris anything to do with Romania?
Nothing besides being the daughters of Princesses of Romania, and descendants of the three previous Romanian Monarchs.

The Prince of Hohenzollern is the first in line of succession according to the Monarchical Constitutional, but he already he wants nothing to do with Romania.

Unless Nicholas Medforth-Mills becomes a Prince of Romania again, eith by his grandfather or aunt's will, or because the Romanian Parliament wants him to be a Prince, I see no chance of a monarchical restoration in Romania.
__________________
“If a thousand thrones I had, I would give a thousand thrones to get the slaves free in Brazil."

Princess Isabel (1846-1921), Princess Imperial and Regent of the Empire of Brazil, after she signed the Golden Law, in 1888, abolishing slavery in Brazil.
Reply With Quote
  #398  
Old 02-26-2016, 05:18 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Kingdom, Heard and McDonald Islands
Posts: 4,160
Maybe Mr Biarneix has more to do with Romania than his daughter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cris M View Post
Instead of choosing one the last King's descendants, Romania would prefer a German Prince "that has nothing to do with Romania" as the new King.

Strong logic.
The German Princes are first of all Princes, second are descendants of the brothers of King Carol I, third have dynastic rights and at kast but not at last are proud of their ancestors.
Are Ms Medforth Mills and Ms Biarneix more connected with Romania? The King 's grandaughters do not even speak Romanian.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAfan View Post
Just like the Hohenzollern Princes don't speak it...
At least the German Princes are not the grandchildren of a Romanian King.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
At one side you have the "candidates" to the headship of the House according to the pre-2007 changes: Karl-Friedrich and Alexander von Hohenzollern, both with a business education and running a big estate with more than 4.000 (!) staff working for them, managing various castles and estates which have been and still are preserved since more than 900 years.

At the other side there is a lady walking around from Newcastle-upon-Tyne, no idea what background she has, how she is educated, what her career is, she is completely invisible, exactly like her cousine from Paris. And these are the better candidates, for managing and preserving the patrimonium of the Romanian branch of the Hohenzollerns? This British or French lady will maintain the large, historic estate of Peles with the castle and the lodge and the surrounding domains? They are able to maintain and manage the house and the domain in Săvârșin? I think few can fight that Prince Karl-Friedrich, Germany's 3rd biggest private landowner, has proven how to manage an immense historic patrimonium and large estates. His son Prince Alexander has studied Economics in Lausanne (Switzerland) and has already enrolled in the board of the Unternehmensgruppe Hohenzollern. The whole estate is managed by professionals.

Forget about a restoration of the monarchy. Think about the patrimonium of the Kings of Romania. Who can preserve it better than the Hohenzollern cousins? They can add the Romanian lands and estates to their collection and manage it with the well-known German efficiency. When it all goes to the lady in the UK or the other one in Paris, I think the first thing you will see is "For Sale" in front of Săvârșin, so that the girls can lead a good life in London or Paris with the profits.
All the properties of the King will be inherired by his descendants.
The Hohenzollern inherit only the dnastic rights but not the properties of the King.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
He was a fraud. Alain Biarneix claimed to be the illegitimate child of an Archduke. The lawyers of Archduke Otto, the last Heir of Austria and Hungary and Head of the House of Habsburg, summoned him to stop spreading these false claims. When Alain Biarneix continued to call himself a Habsburg, the lawyers of Archduke Otto came in action. He was finally sued for false impersonation and was forced to give up the claim as there was no any relation to the Habsburgers.

Afther this he started to go into society under the pseudonym "Alain de Laufenborg". He came in contact with Princess Sofia of Romania, managed to get her into his spell and married her, very much against King Michael's wishes. The King stripped his daughter from her title Princess of Romania and her style HRH (What is new?) because he thought this fraud, faker and impersonator was an "undesirable" annex to the House of Romania, also seeing the legal intervention by the House of Habsburg against her daughter's partner.

Alain and Sofia got a daughter: Elisabeth Biarneix. Afther the divorce from Alain, King Michael changed his mind once again (what is new?) and restored his daughter's title Princess of Romania and her style HRH. The daughter of this fraud, faker and impersonator was never a member of the Royal House nor was ever in the line of succession, until King Michael changed his mind once more (What is new?) and created a whole new line of succession, including the daughter of the man he disapproved so much that he stripped his own daughter from her royal position...
Is Mr Biarneix living in Romania or just visiting ofen the country?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
When it are all private properties yes. When it is set into a House Foundation, it depends on the statutes. But indeed, when it all goes to the descendants in the UK, the USA and France, it is logical that the Fürst von Hohenzollern shrugs his shoulders and continue managing his own formidable assets than following cousin Michael's adventures. But a Prince Karl-Friedrich or a Prince Alexander, with their thousands of staff behind them, are a formidable party for a monarchist movement. I can not see how the British girl, Karina, can ever fly the flag for the House of Romania.
The Hohenzollerns can inherit only dynastic rights in Romania and nothing more.

The descendants of King Michael are not dynasts according to the Constitutions of the Kingdom of Romania so al the decisions regarding dynastic rights to them are mot really relevant.

There is no connection know between the Hohenzollrn Princes and the non-dynastic descendants of King Mihai.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #399  
Old 02-26-2016, 06:16 PM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 7,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory View Post
Maybe Mr Biarneix has more to do with Romania than his daughter.
He was a fraud. Alain Biarneix claimed to be the illegitimate child of an Archduke. The lawyers of Archduke Otto, the last Heir of Austria and Hungary and Head of the House of Habsburg, summoned him to stop spreading these false claims. When Alain Biarneix continued to call himself a Habsburg, the lawyers of Archduke Otto came in action. He was finally sued for false impersonation and was forced to give up the claim as there was no any relation to the Habsburgers.

Afther this he started to go into society under the pseudonym "Alain de Laufenborg". He came in contact with Princess Sofia of Romania, managed to get her into his spell and married her, very much against King Michael's wishes. The King stripped his daughter from her title Princess of Romania and her style HRH (What is new?) because he thought this fraud, faker and impersonator was an "undesirable" annex to the House of Romania, also seeing the legal intervention by the House of Habsburg against his daughter's partner.

Alain and Sofia got a daughter: Elisabeth Biarneix. Afther the divorce from Alain, King Michael changed his mind once again (what is new?) and restored his daughter's title Princess of Romania and her style HRH. The daughter of this fraud, faker and impersonator was never a member of the Royal House nor was ever in the line of succession, until King Michael changed his mind once more (What is new?) and created a whole new line of succession, including the daughter of the man he disapproved so much that he stripped his own daughter from her royal position...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #400  
Old 02-26-2016, 06:19 PM
MAfan's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: N/A, Italy
Posts: 5,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory View Post
The King 's grandaughters do not even speak Romanian.
Just like the Hohenzollern Princes don't speak it...
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
hohenzollern, hohenzollern-sigmaringen, romania, royal family of romania, succession


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (1 members and 1 guests)
cosmin
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Mechanics of Abdication and of Succession to the Throne Ellie2 British Royals 212 12-29-2015 11:18 AM
Are the Orleans-Braganza in the line of succession to the French throne? Lecen Royal Families of France 7 12-27-2014 09:49 PM
Royal Family of Romania frank22 Royal Library 9 03-15-2013 10:19 PM
Prince Nayef bin Abdulaziz is named second in succession to the throne Itzimane Royal Family of Saudi Arabia 1 03-28-2009 07:42 AM




Popular Tags
antony armstrong-jones birthday books carl gustaf chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown princess elisabeth crown princess mary crown princess victoria current events denmark duke of cambridge duke of edinburgh earl of snowdon europe family general news grand duke jean guillaume hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume historical infanta cristina infanta leonor infanta sofia ińaki urdangarín james bond king felipe king felipe vi king philippe king willem-alexander letizia liechtenstein margherita monarchy news prince alexander prince carl philip prince daniel prince emmanuel prince felix prince gabriel prince harry prince nicholas prince oscar princess beatrice princess claire of luxembourg princess estelle princess leonore princess madeleine princess of asturias princess sofia princess victoria queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen margerthe queen mathilde queen maxima queen silvia queen sofia shaikh zayed bin hamdan bin zayed al nahyan state visit stephanie sweden swedish royal family tiara victoria



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:31 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017
Jelsoft Enterprises