The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   Royal Family of Spain (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f21/)
-   -   King Juan Carlos's Path to the Spanish Crown (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f21/king-juan-carloss-path-to-the-spanish-crown-11638.html)

bebajp 12-21-2006 10:26 PM

King Juan Carlos's Path to the Spanish Crown
 
There's the story about how King Juan Carlos became king of Spain, I think General Franco did some changes and chose Juan Carlos over Don Alfonso de Borbon, his cousin.

Does somebody know the complete story about this?

:flowers:

Marengo 12-22-2006 03:25 AM

The only change Franco made was to surpass the Count of Barcelona and chose his son, Juan-Carlos instead. But this branch was ver much the one who inhereted the claim to the spanish throne, and not the branch of Alfonso. There were rumous however that Franco would pass Juan & Juan-Carlos and would select Alfonso instead.

crisiñaki 12-22-2006 03:45 AM

The last King of Spain before Franco was Alfonso XIII, he had several children and the Count of Barcelona was the third son, way behind his older brothers Jaime and Alfonso but as they were deaf and haemophilic, Juan (King JC's father) became the heir to the throne; Alfonso, the Duke of Cadiz (was a descendant of Jaime, the Duke of Segovia and second son of Alfonso XIII, whom after the death of his father tried to reclaim his rights) became a serious pretender when he married Carmen Martinez-Bordiu (Franco's grandaughter and mother of Luis Alfonso de Borbón) but at the end Franco named JC as his heir and that's how he's King in our days

I hope I made myself clear enough with my explanation!:lol::lol::lol:

lula 12-22-2006 04:31 AM

The brothers of Don Juan had to resign the throne. Alfonso because he decided to marry a plebeian woman and Jaime because he had remained deaf and dumb of child for a disease. On Don Jaime's topic there is a spice of tragic history - legend .... though it is evident that in that epoch the normal thing is that they were forcing him to resign, because he was not a person qualified to occupy the throne; If today in day the persons with disabilities have problems to join a normal life, though every time they have help more, imagine 70 years ago. Later he took a very untid life,frustrated by his disease. For not being able to be King, and with two wives who wanted to turn into queens.:wacko:

Therefore, the head of family passed to be Don Juan. Don Juan worked many years for the Wreath, and ultimately he had to accept that he was his son who was occupying the throne. For Don Juan it was something difficult, which took him even to problems with his son ... but ultimately he was the statesman who had to be, and with his son already King resigned to his rights being yielded to his son.

They are questions of history, histories how these there are many in many countries throughout the centuries.;)

ladejesus 12-22-2006 06:46 AM

This is fascinating! I hadn't heard any of this history.

adelaide 12-22-2006 09:06 AM

Yes it's very interesting as quiet all the historic acts of the Spain ( one of reasons of my interest for Spain)

For those who know Carmen Martinez Bordiu, can you think that she would be a so good Queen as Sofia, besides to be the queen of danse's pists in the TV emission " Mira quien va a bailar ! " or something like that......

lula 12-22-2006 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adelaide
Yes it's very interesting as quiet all the historic acts of the Spain ( one of reasons of my interest for Spain)

For those who know Carmen Martinez Bordiu, can you think that she would be a so good Queen as Sofia, besides to be the queen of danse's pists in the TV emission " Mira quien va a bailar ! " or something like that......

Carmen always has been a pampered and capricious girl who has done what has wanted without importing anything for her.

Personally to think about her representing Spain, she frightens me so much like to see her to dance. :ohmy: :lol:

Enrique 12-29-2006 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lula
The brothers of Don Juan had to resign the throne. Alfonso because he decided to marry a plebeian woman and Jaime because he had remained deaf and dumb of child for a disease. On Don Jaime's topic there is a spice of tragic history - legend .... though it is evident that in that epoch the normal thing is that they were forcing him to resign, because he was not a person qualified to occupy the throne; If today in day the persons with disabilities have problems to join a normal life, though every time they have help more, imagine 70 years ago. Later he took a very untid life,frustrated by his disease. For not being able to be King, and with two wives who wanted to turn into queens.:wacko:

Therefore, the head of family passed to be Don Juan. Don Juan worked many years for the Wreath, and ultimately he had to accept that he was his son who was occupying the throne. For Don Juan it was something difficult, which took him even to problems with his son ... but ultimately he was the statesman who had to be, and with his son already King resigned to his rights being yielded to his son.

They are questions of history, histories how these there are many in many countries throughout the centuries.;)

Hello Lula.

Don Jaime (Duke of Segovia and Infante de Epaña) renounced his rights to the Spanish throne for himself and his descendants because he was deaf-mute. But in 1949 he took back his renunciation and the Carlistas recognized as King of Spain (King Jaime IV -Carlista line-).

I think that he, at last, renounced in favour of Don Alfonso, I dont know.

Happy New year 2007!!!!

White Princess 11-09-2010 01:50 AM

Spain's Transition to Democracy
 
Hi! :flowers:
I am making a search for my University about the rule of king Juan Carlos and the royal family in the transition to democracy after's Franco death. Could anybody help me with links and referencies? I'd be very thankful. :smile:

Keystone 11-13-2010 11:24 AM

Juan Carlos: Steering Spain from Dictatorship to Democracy


Enjoy!

carlfraley 01-08-2013 04:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enrique (Post 552541)

Hello Lula.

Don Jaime (Duke of Segovia and Infante de Epaña) renounced his rights to the Spanish throne for himself and his descendants because he was deaf-mute. But in 1949 he took back his renunciation and the Carlistas recognized as King of Spain (King Jaime IV -Carlista line-).

I think that he, at last, renounced in favour of Don Alfonso, I dont know.

Happy New year 2007!!!!




I find it hard to take back a irrevocable decision. Till her death HM Queen VE refused to consider anything of the kind.

WreathOfLaurels 06-26-2016 09:07 PM

Hi everyone,

I've been researching Juan Carlos's role in the spainsh transition to democracy in contrast to the parallel events in Greece and his brother in law Constantine's deposition.

What I'm wondering is just how much of it comes down to differing personalities and different circumstances. Although most authors have put this down to JC simply being more 'serious' and 'responsible' than Constantine, I think there is a better case to be made that the different socio-economic development of Spain and Greece was the main factor in the successes and failures of the two kings.

What does anyone else on this site think - I'm very keen to know :)

Tatiana Maria 06-26-2016 11:40 PM

:previous:

A very interesting question. I would appreciate hearing your conclusions and those of the other members here.

WreathOfLaurels 06-27-2016 07:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria (Post 1903459)
:previous:

A very interesting question. I would appreciate hearing your conclusions and those of the other members here.

Sorry about the delay in replying Tatiana Maria, here is my hypothesis in a nutshell*,

Spain in the 1970's had a higher level of economic development and urbanization than Greece. The Spanish left was for all intents and purposes, exterminated, by Franco's forces during the civil war and its aftermath. Most opposition to the central regime in Madrid was either based in the non-Castilian regions (Catalonia, the Basque country), or came from the right. Spain was not facing any major treats on its borders and its strategic value was limited. Despite a 40 year dictatorship, Spain's political institutions (eg the Cortes) were old and with a few interruptions, continuous.

Greece in the late 1960's however, was still predominantly rural, industrialization and the shift to the cities (in 1967 at least 25% of the population lived in Athens alone) had only really begun in the 1950's. Greece also had greater perceived threats to its territorial integrity both within (the Slavic minorities) and on the outside (its then communist Balkan neighbors), along with a tradition of military intervention in civilian politics to protect its own privileged status in society, one of the overlooked factors in the 1967 coup was proposed cuts to military spending. Politics was based on clan ties and patronage - the only party that had any real ideology was the communist party. In other words, Greece's difficulties was in a different magnitude than Spain and on top of that was the fact that outside interference was a bigger factor in Greek politics than ever was the case. First Britain, than the USA, had major influence over governments of the day, at one point any potential prime ministerial appointments had to be approved by the US embassy in Athens.

Juan Carlos, compared to Constantine, also became king at 38, whereas Constantine was only 23 when he succeeded his father. 15 years is a huge gap in life experience and the difference in actions during their respective attempts to 'troubleshoot' problems shows. A lot of people often criticize Constantine when comparing his and JC"s relative experiences, but overlook the gap in age between the two at the time of ascension. Linked to this was the fact that JC had time as heir to reach out to political figures who shared his views and desires (a crown princes party if you will) most important of all, Adolfo Suarez. Constantine did not get this luxury and was unable in the time-frame he had to establish a political identity separate to that of his parents, something was to be a major disadvantage in attempting to reach out to the non-communist left and Greece's liberals during the junta years.

Fundamentally, the reason why JC was able to enjoy his tenure as king (at least until he had to abdicate due to the unfortunate business with the elephant and the puffy lipped lady) was due to Spain being more economically developed and being possessed of a more mature political culture than Greece.

*These are just the main points, there's a lot I've compressed for space and had to leave out. :)

Tatiana Maria 06-27-2016 12:54 PM

Thank you very much for the reply, which I think demonstrates that Spain and Greece are a comparison of apples and oranges when the infrastructure and the systemic risks are understood, although it sounds as if Juan Carlos's prowess in networking assisted him.

WreathOfLaurels 06-27-2016 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria (Post 1903634)
Thank you very much for the reply, which I think demonstrates that Spain and Greece are a comparison of apples and oranges when the infrastructure and the systemic risks are understood, although it sounds as if Juan Carlos's prowess in networking assisted him.

I don't think it's so much a case of skill as it is time. networking is a lengthy and time consuming process and it's not easy to do so when a full time job of being head of state is factored in.

There's some other things I will go into a bit later when I get access to a proper computer - posting on a smartphone is not good for long messages

WreathOfLaurels 07-05-2016 12:28 AM

Here's more of what I was saying above, sorry for the delay.

Another factor in the success of kingship is that of role models and mentors. JC was in some ways lucky in that he had two models to follow - Don Juan and Franco, with JC's eventual approach being a mix of the two, with Franco's political skills and Don Juan's liberalism, inclusive approach to being 'king of all Spaniards' and Humanity, an excellent combination that has served him well. He was also willing to actually trust his politicians.

C on the other hand had only one model - his father and Paul was not what I would call a good royal role model. Despite the general trend of throwing all mistakes at Freddy's feet, Paul had strong authoritarian instincts and often ignored and snubbed politicians who attempted to move in on what he considered his turf eg Plastrides and Karamanlis and his interventions caused a great deal of unnecessary political trouble (Freddy's contribution was small by comparison). He was not a good role model for C - really can't help wondering what might have happened if C had had more time to spend around his father in law Frederik...

BUT, there is also a second point, the main reason why monarchies collapse is not due to public popularity (if that was the case than the Queen and the entire BRF would have all been guillotined in Piccadilly Square in 1997), but elite support, and in particular, whether these monarchs are capable of protecting their status and property, something that is not easy when society and economy are undergoing rapid transformation (Dominic Lieven's Bio of Nicholas II of Russia has more on this phenomenon and Samuel Huntington has also written about the problems of democratisation and traditional authority). The main reason the Spanish monarchy stayed in place post 1975 was that too many of Spain's elites feared a return to the days of the republic but also were at some level able to acknowledge the need for reform and some redistribution. In Greece, their politicians and wealthy were looking for a fall guy for a political failure and embarrassment that was of their own making, it did not take much to set C up as the patsy - because its not like much in Greece really changed over the last 40 years as recent events have shown.

Tatiana Maria 07-05-2016 07:19 PM

WreathofLaurels, I truly appreciate your thorough analysis. If another candidate had been appointed to the Spanish thronee, do you believe he would have succeeded as well as Juan Carlos?

WreathOfLaurels 07-08-2016 03:58 AM

No o don't think so as the success was not due to JC alone, there were a number of others eg Suarez, Don Juan to name two. Carlos Hugo was not well known enough and Carlism was in the way out. Alfonso Cadiz did not have the same credibity with the military and being married to one of Franco's granddaughters would have been a massive albatross.

carlfraley 07-08-2016 05:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WreathOfLaurels (Post 1906291)
Here's more of what I was saying above, sorry for the delay.

Another factor in the success of kingship is that of role models and mentors. JC was in some ways lucky in that he had two models to follow - Don Juan and Franco, with JC's eventual approach being a mix of the two, with Franco's political skills and Don Juan's liberalism, inclusive approach to being 'king of all Spaniards' and Humanity, an excellent combination that has served him well. He was also willing to actually trust his politicians.

C on the other hand had only one model - his father and Paul was not what I would call a good royal role model. Despite the general trend of throwing all mistakes at Freddy's feet, Paul had strong authoritarian instincts and often ignored and snubbed politicians who attempted to move in on what he considered his turf eg Plastrides and Karamanlis and his interventions caused a great deal of unnecessary political trouble (Freddy's contribution was small by comparison). He was not a good role model for C - really can't help wondering what might have happened if C had had more time to spend around his father in law Frederik...

BUT, there is also a second point, the main reason why monarchies collapse is not due to public popularity (if that was the case than the Queen and the entire BRF would have all been guillotined in Piccadilly Square in 1997), but elite support, and in particular, whether these monarchs are capable of protecting their status and property, something that is not easy when society and economy are undergoing rapid transformation (Dominic Lieven's Bio of Nicholas II of Russia has more on this phenomenon and Samuel Huntington has also written about the problems of democratisation and traditional authority). The main reason the Spanish monarchy stayed in place post 1975 was that too many of Spain's elites feared a return to the days of the republic but also were at some level able to acknowledge the need for reform and some redistribution. In Greece, their politicians and wealthy were looking for a fall guy for a political failure and embarrassment that was of their own making, it did not take much to set C up as the patsy - because its not like much in Greece really changed over the last 40 years as recent events have shown.

I will have to go into more detail and quote King Pauls letter's word for word when i get off work in a few hours but I disagree with you on this. HM King Paul was an excellent role model for HM King Constantine on what a Constitutional Monarch should have been. King Paul took his role very serious, as both Head of state, Head of the Armed forces, as the Only Orthodox Monarch. It's been 60 years since HM has died and more and more truths are surfacing about the "Real" King Paul and Queen Frederica and it's about time both of them were redeemed. Konstantinos Mitsotakis himself said that most of they myths about HM Queen Frederika were just that, myths, she was completely feminine, not subservient , but not dominant , (I can't remember his word- She did not rule Pavlos-). He also said "Had Pavlos Lived another 10 years, Greece would be different now, the Monarchy would have survived 1967".

Also , King Paul intervened when and if after consulting his ministers, even Georgios Papandreou, is cited multiple times in writing , (his own letters )to King Paul, calling the King as the Supreme Arbiter of the Greek Constitution & Parliment.
Konstantinos G. Karamanlis- OWES everything he had to King Paul. King Paul is the one who chose him from nowhere to be Premiere. King Paul chose him , not using the normal formula because the King (using his Royal Perogative to choose Premiere thinking the Greeks needed new blood), Karamanlis stabbed His master /Sovereign in the back, he allowed petty attacks to be made against King Paul and The Queen and didn't defend or attempt to defend the Sovereign , even when the King asked him why he allowed such attack to be made w/out any defence. When Georgios Papandreou defeated him, he went into self exile. WHen the Coup of 67 happened , the military believed they were acting on the orders of the King. Karamanlis saw his opportunity and he stabbed the son of his former Master (King Constantine ) in the back.

no on one part of your statement i will agree with you, nothing in Greece has changed in the last 150 years, whenever the Greek politicians need a scapegoat they simply looked to their former Sovereigns. But King Paul was a Dedicated, hardworking Sovereign and IMO should be forever recognized as such. King Paul was a role model for any man whether a King, Prince, Son, Student , or just a regular joe.
As the King said to his Son on his Coming of age Ceremony-"Draw your Strength from Love alone, redress offense by forgiveness, discord by unity, error by truth, doubt by Faith."


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:19 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises