The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #121  
Old 10-13-2021, 03:42 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Los Angeles area, United States
Posts: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
I have no problems with Royal Houses changing rules, as long as it is in general agreement with all members involved.

This means that the Savoia-Aostas and the Savoias have to come together. And if no agreement is reached, the existing situation should remain, in my personal opinion.

King Michael of Romania would never have changed the succession, had he sons indeed. The Duke of Castro would never have changed the succession, had he sons indeed.

The reason "we have to cope with modern times" comes handy, now these royals are facing the limits of the very same rules with which they became head of the House.

In the Calabria / Castro case there was even a sort of peace and recognition between the two branches of the House of Bourbon-Two Sicilies but it did not last long: totally out of the blue the Duke of Castro bombarded his daughters as his successors without any consultation of the rest of the House.

That these gentlemen themselves often reached their position by excluding females, like elder sisters, is conveniently forgotten when they suddenly found "modern times". It is the same as the current head of the House of France, prince Jean d'Orléans (who has two sons) being faced with only daughters and deciding to change the ancient rules to accomodate this "undesireable" situation. But now he has sons indeed, it would never come in his mind to change the rules and risk a factional dispute within the Maison d'Orléans.
Completely and fully agreed with your entire analysis here.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old 10-13-2021, 03:47 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Los Angeles area, United States
Posts: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavs View Post
And really, if the titles aren't legal, who is actually going to be able to stop an illegitimate child calling themselves Prince or Princess if they so choose? They might not get invited to the society events but they could still claim it.
An illegitimate child can certainly call themselves Prince or Princess, but this is different from actually having a claim to a defunct royal throne, let alone having this claim be recognized by other people.

Several centuries ago, Louis XIV of France gave his various illegitimate sons various noble titles and legitimized them, but his attempt to put his various illegitimate sons into the line of succession to the French throne ended up swiftly being reversed after his death, for instance. But they did keep their noble titles and passed them onto their descendants, if I recall correctly.

Quote:
Then in the opposite direction you have families like the Thynns where their second son is biologically theirs but because was a born from a surrogate for medical reasons, he isn't 2nd in line for the Marquisate after his brother.
I didn't realize that you needed to not only be genetically related, but also to come out of a specific womb in order to inherit a particular royal and/or noble title. Interesting. I'll need to research this more.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 10-13-2021, 03:58 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Los Angeles area, United States
Posts: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
Agreed. In Spain in the 2000s there was a public consensus between the major political parties that the eldest child of the then Prince and Princess of Asturias ought to succeed to the throne, irrespective of gender. The obstacle was the absence of agreement between political parties in regard to opening the Constitution to other, unrelated reforms. The Prince and Princess resolved the constitutional problem by not having a son.
Yep, I read about that.

Quote:
Also agreed. In former reigning houses, the decision to keep or change rules belongs to the head of the house, whereas in many reigning monarchies it belongs to the elected parliament. If the Bernadottes of Sweden were a non-reigning house, for instance, Carl XVI Gustaf as its head would most certainly apply a male-preference succession rule.
Agreed.

Quote:
I also agree with your prediction that in countries where there is little outrage about gender inequality, agnatic or male-preference succession would likely be retained unless the male line was in danger of extinction.
Yep. This is why, for instance, I certainly don't see Jordan or Morocco actually changing their royal succession laws anytime soon. Japan might eventually (feminism is very likely more widespread there), but again, probably not to the extent that Prince Hisahito is deprived of his birthright to the Japanese throne.

If a country still has a monarchy right now, then I do think that of course it would be prudent as a moral matter to allow female succession. Though I would still enjoy it in any case when a particular country's royal--or former royal--family is able to maintain an uninterrupted male line for an extremely long time, even if this country will no longer stick to agnatic primogeniture. It's fascinating, for instance, how the Capetians, Savoyards, Japanese Imperial Family, et cetera have all been able to maintain an uninterrupted male line for something like 1,000 or more years. (Of course, Japanese royals had concubines to help them with this until the late 1800s, if I recall correctly, but as far as I know, European royal families such as the Capetians and Savoyards only allowed legitimate children to inherit their countries' thrones.)
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 10-13-2021, 04:03 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Los Angeles area, United States
Posts: 79
Alternate history question: What effects will a restored French monarchy have on WWII

Here's a very random but nevertheless interesting alternate history question: If the French monarchy is restored in the early 1870s (due to Henri, Count of Chambord dying a decade or more earlier than he did in real life, thus allowing the French monarchy to be restored during this time under the Orleanists) and we somehow use a whole lot of magic to avoid the butterfly effect (please see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butter...dward%20Lorenz. ) over the next 70 years, what effects would France being a monarchy have on developments in France during World War II? I'm asking because if the French monarchy will support Philippe Petain's Vichy regime, then it would be considerably more difficult for someone like Charles de Gaulle to create a Free French Movement in exile considering that he would be guilty of not only rebellion, but also of lese majeste, no? And of course if the French monarchy does indeed decide to support Philippe Petain's Vichy regime in this scenario and the Allies still win World War II in this scenario, then the French monarchy would very likely get overthrown after the end of World War II and replaced with a French republic, no?

Anyway, any thoughts on all of this?
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 10-13-2021, 04:29 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Futurist View Post
Latin America would be a more interesting question if its monarchies would have survived since Latin America is full of developing countries but nevertheless has considerable Western cultural influence in regards to things such as feminism (not to mention LGBTQ+ rights!). So, I suspect that any surviving Latin American monarchies would have likewise felt compelled to eventually scrap agnatic primogeniture and/or a ban on morganatic marriages.

Anyway, what do you personally think about all of this?

The Brazilian Empire was a Latin American monarchy and, like the Portuguese monarchy, it didn't use agnatic primogeniture, but rather male-preference cognatic primogeniture.


For example, if Emperor Pedro II of Brazil had not been deposed, he would have been succeeded by his daughter, Princess Isabel.
Reply With Quote
  #126  
Old 10-13-2021, 04:44 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Futurist View Post
Do you have any specific examples in mind here? I could find one example of this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knud,_...ir_presumptive



But Yeah, ultimately, a decision that was made by a country's democratically-elected parliament or even directly by a country's voters (through a referendum) would almost certainly be perceived as being more legitimate than a decision that was made unilaterally. This wouldn't only apply to female royal succession, BTW. Rather, this could also apply to allow adopted and/or illegitimate children to inherit a country's throne or even to remove someone from the royal line of succession so that someone more qualified (a second son/child) can inherit the throne in their place.

The Savoyard Kings could not change the succession laws unilaterally. Neither could the King of Denmark. In Italy, however, under the Albertine Statute (the constitution of the Kingdom of Italy), it was possible to change the succession rules by ordinary law, which would be fairly easy then.



In Denmark, on the other hand, the Succession to the Throne Act is enshrined in the constitution so, in order to change it, the Parliament has to pass a bill to that effect twice in two consecutive legislatures (i.e. with a general election in between) and, after that, the bill still needs to be put to a popular referendum, where it has to be backed by a majority of the votes cast and by at least 40% of the eligible voters.
Reply With Quote
  #127  
Old 10-13-2021, 04:48 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Los Angeles area, United States
Posts: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
The Savoyard Kings could not change the succession laws unilaterally. Neither could the King of Denmark. In Italy, however, under the Albertine Statute (the constitution of the Kingdom of Italy), it was possible to change the succession rules by ordinary law, which would be fairly easy then.

In Denmark, on the other hand, the Succession to the Throne Act is enshrined in the constitution so, in order to change it, the Parliament has to pass a bill to that effect twice in two consecutive legislatures (i.e. with a general election in between) and, after that, the bill still needs to be put to a popular referendum, where it has to be backed by a majority of the votes cast and by at least 40% of the eligible voters.
Interesting. Thank you for this explanation. Anyway, even an ordinary law that is made by a country's democratically-elected parliament should still have a lot of legitimacy, I'm presuming.
Reply With Quote
  #128  
Old 10-13-2021, 04:56 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Los Angeles area, United States
Posts: 79
Question: Do you think that the Afghanistan War (2001-2021) would have had a different and happier ending had the Afghan monarchy been restored back in 2001-2002?
Reply With Quote
  #129  
Old 10-13-2021, 05:30 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Los Angeles area, United States
Posts: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavs View Post
And really, if the titles aren't legal, who is actually going to be able to stop an illegitimate child calling themselves Prince or Princess if they so choose? They might not get invited to the society events but they could still claim it.
FWIW, there is a case of an illegitimate son of the Duke of Parma doing just this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince...ynstra_and_son

Quote:
Prince Carlos had a relationship with Brigitte Klynstra (born 10 January 1959), the stepdaughter of Count Adolph Roderik van Rechteren Limpurg. During this relationship he fathered a son:

Carlos Hugo Roderik Sybren Klynstra (born 20 January 1997 in Nijmegen).
In December 2015, the then 18-year-old Carlos Klynstra started the legal procedure to attempt to change his surname to that of his biological father[4] which would also allow him to use the title of "Prince". The Duke of Parma opposed this on the basis that it was in contravention of the traditions of the House of Bourbon-Parma. On 9 March 2016 the Minister of Security and Justice declared his family name request valid.[5] Later that year a court in The Hague concurred with the minister in declaring the claim valid under Dutch law.[6]

According to the judgement, Carlos Hugo will be entitled to be known as "Zijne Koninklijke Hoogheid Carlos Hugo Roderik Sybren prins de Bourbon de Parme" (His Royal Highness Prince Carlos Hugo Roderik Sybren of Bourbon-Parma); this will come only into effect once the Dutch king has signed the royal decree. According to the press release of the Council of State of 28 February 2018, the name change does not mean that Klynstra is now also a member of the Royal House De Bourbon de Parme. That is a private matter of the House itself and this is outside the jurisdiction of the Dutch Nobility Law.[7]
But Yeah, if of course he ever actually attempts to claim to be the Duke of Parma after his father's death, then his claim simply won't be recognized. Heck, even if his father will change his mind about this and make him his designated successor (extraordinarily unlikely, but just assuming purely for the sake of argument), I suspect that most royalists would still oppose such a unilateral move on his father's part and instead recognize his father's younger, legitimate son (the one who was born in 2016) as his father's rightful heir after his father's death, whenever that will be.
Reply With Quote
  #130  
Old 10-13-2021, 05:48 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 4,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by Futurist View Post
I didn't realize that you needed to not only be genetically related, but also to come out of a specific womb in order to inherit a particular royal and/or noble title. Interesting. I'll need to research this more.
You might be interested in the position statement on this issue delivered by a previous UK government.

https://publications.parliament.uk/p...31206-0002.htm


Quote:
Originally Posted by Futurist View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavs View Post
And really, if the titles aren't legal, who is actually going to be able to stop an illegitimate child calling themselves Prince or Princess if they so choose? They might not get invited to the society events but they could still claim it.
An illegitimate child can certainly call themselves Prince or Princess, but this is different from actually having a claim to a defunct royal throne, let alone having this claim be recognized by other people.
Claims to defunct royal thrones are rarely legal, thus Heavs's point would still be relevant by analogy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Futurist View Post
FWIW, there is a case of an illegitimate son of the Duke of Parma doing just this:
Hugo Klynstra's rights to inherit the legal title (HRH Prince) and surname (de Bourbon de Parme) of his father were recognized by a Dutch court of law pursuant to the Dutch nobility law, which differs from the scenario discussed in Heavs's post of a child simply beginning to call themselves by a title which was never legally theirs.

In contrast, Duke of Parma, as well as King of Spain, the other non-legal title assumed by Hugo's father, would be fitting examples if Hugo were to claim them, as they are not legally recognized for either Hugo or his father.
Reply With Quote
  #131  
Old 10-13-2021, 06:06 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 4,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavs View Post
With cases like Bourbon Two Scillies, The Duke of Castro actually broke an agreement with the Duke of Calabria to name his daughter his "successor".
Naming his daughter as his successor was not a breach of agreement between the two claimants, since the agreement explicitly did not reference the disputed headship:

Quote:
"Their Royal Highnesses, Prince Carlo of Bourbon Two Sicilies, Duke of Castro and Prince Pedro of Bourbon Two Sicilies, Duke of Noto, reiterate the fact that in the Dynastic Family agreement signed in Naples on January 25th 2014, there is no mentioning of any references to the Headship of the Royal House of Bourbon Two Sicilies and that all allegations and inferences to that respect are without any foundation".
The agreement did reference mutual recognition of the claimants' assumed titles, so that by awarding the title Duchess of Calabria to his daughter while it remained in use by the other claimant and his wife, he arguably did break the agreement.
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 10-13-2021, 08:06 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 4,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by Futurist View Post
Do you have any specific examples in mind here? I could find one example of this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knud,_...ir_presumptive
King Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden aired his feelings in regard to his daughter being made his heiress over his son by Parliament, most recently in 2003. You will find articles on his remarks in this thread.

https://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...nge-10379.html

Prince Laurent of Belgium apparently expressed resentment at being bypassed by his older sister in an interview for Het Laatste Nieuws in the late 1990s, though I have not found a direct quotation.

Thank you by the way for the thoughtful discussions you have started.
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 10-13-2021, 08:42 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Los Angeles area, United States
Posts: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
King Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden aired his feelings in regard to his daughter being made his heiress over his son by Parliament, most recently in 2003. You will find articles on his remarks in this thread.

https://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...nge-10379.html

Prince Laurent of Belgium apparently expressed resentment at being bypassed by his older sister in an interview for Het Laatste Nieuws in the late 1990s, though I have not found a direct quotation.
The issue that I have with the Swedish case is that an actual person was stripped of their birthright. He was an infant at the time, but still. It would have been better to do this before his birth or, alternatively, to limit it to future generations.

(Though if we're going to be honest, if a country is going to have a monarchy, maybe an elective monarchy along the lines of Cambodia should be given a strong look. After all, why exactly should elder children always be favored over younger children if younger children could, in some cases, be more competent than their elder siblings are?)

Quote:
Thank you by the way for the thoughtful discussions you have started.
No problem! :) I try my best!
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 10-13-2021, 08:48 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Los Angeles area, United States
Posts: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
You might be interested in the position statement on this issue delivered by a previous UK government.

https://publications.parliament.uk/p...31206-0002.htm




Claims to defunct royal thrones are rarely legal, thus Heavs's point would still be relevant by analogy.



Hugo Klynstra's rights to inherit the legal title (HRH Prince) and surname (de Bourbon de Parme) of his father were recognized by a Dutch court of law pursuant to the Dutch nobility law, which differs from the scenario discussed in Heavs's post of a child simply beginning to call themselves by a title which was never legally theirs.

In contrast, Duke of Parma, as well as King of Spain, the other non-legal title assumed by Hugo's father, would be fitting examples if Hugo were to claim them, as they are not legally recognized for either Hugo or his father.
Thanks for your link here! :) And Yeah, good point distinguishing between legally recognized and legally unrecognized titles.
Reply With Quote
  #135  
Old 10-14-2021, 04:56 AM
Stefan's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Esslingen, Germany
Posts: 5,522
Quote:
Originally Posted by Futurist View Post
The issue that I have with the Swedish case is that an actual person was stripped of their birthright. He was an infant at the time, but still. It would have been better to do this before his birth or, alternatively, to limit it to future generations.
That was not possible because of the legal work which had to be done to change to succession law. It had to be approved a second time by a new elected Parliament (the election took place in autumn 1979) before coming into effect.
So one can say that Prince Csrl Philip was simply born at the wrong time. Had he been born a few months later the law had already been changed.
__________________
Stefan



Reply With Quote
  #136  
Old 10-14-2021, 05:03 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Los Angeles area, United States
Posts: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stefan View Post
That was not possible because of the legal work which had to be done to change to succession law. It had to be approved a second time by a new elected Parliament (the election took place in autumn 1979) before coming into effect.
So one can say that Prince Csrl Philip was simply born at the wrong time. Had he been born a few months later the law had already been changed.
Well, they could have theoretically began the process of changing this law even sooner than they actually did in real life!
Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 10-14-2021, 05:13 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 6,700
There was never any expectation that CP would be the future king. The new law had already been approved but needed a second approval. That was known at the time of his birth, so while I generally agree that these things should not apply to living people (as much as possible). In this case, it made sense, because it would have been even weirder if the change had only applied to those born after 1980 - because in that case if Madeleine had been a boy, Victoria as a girl would have been superseded by one of her younger brothers but not by the other. The intention from the start was clearly that it would apply to the children of Carl Gustaf.
Reply With Quote
  #138  
Old 10-14-2021, 05:16 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Los Angeles area, United States
Posts: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
There was never any expectation that CP would be the future king. The new law had already been approved but needed a second approval. That was known at the time of his birth, so while I generally agree that these things should not apply to living people (as much as possible). In this case, it made sense, because it would have been even weirder if the change had only applied to those born after 1980 - because in that case if Madeleine had been a boy, Victoria as a girl would have been superseded by one of her younger brothers but not by the other. The intention from the start was clearly that it would apply to the children of Carl Gustaf.
That makes sense; thank you for this explanation! :)
Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 10-14-2021, 08:44 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
There was never any expectation that CP would be the future king.

Maybe the Royal Court had a different expectation. Didn't they display the Crown Prince's crown at CP's christening?
Reply With Quote
  #140  
Old 10-15-2021, 04:47 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Los Angeles area, United States
Posts: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
The Brazilian Empire was a Latin American monarchy and, like the Portuguese monarchy, it didn't use agnatic primogeniture, but rather male-preference cognatic primogeniture.

For example, if Emperor Pedro II of Brazil had not been deposed, he would have been succeeded by his daughter, Princess Isabel.
Thanks for clarifying this part.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
edward vii, george vi, king edward vii


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
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
General information and questions about Monaco and the Princely Family leyla Princely Family of Monaco 602 08-07-2021 12:52 PM
General Swedish Royalty Facts, Discussion and Questions GrandDuchess Royal House of Sweden 297 05-06-2021 04:11 PM
Princess Caroline‘s Role in Monaco kittencrews Princess Caroline and Family 952 03-06-2021 12:42 PM
General news and Questions about Princess Lalla Salma and her family justine King Mohammed VI and Princess Lalla Salma and Family 140 11-27-2018 11:09 AM




Popular Tags
america american archie mountbatten-windsor asia birth britain britannia british british royal family buckingham palace camilla's family camilla parker bowles china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing clarence house colorblindness commonwealth countries coronation customs doge of venice dresses duchess of sussex duke of sussex edward vii elizabeth ii family tree fashion and style gemstones genetics gradenigo harry and meghan hello! henry viii history house of windsor japan japan history jewellery kensington palace king edward vii king juan carlos liechtenstein line of succession list of rulers medical meghan markle monarchist movements monarchists monarchy names nara period plantinum jubilee politics portugal prince harry queen elizabeth ii queen victoria royal ancestry solomon j solomon spanish royal family state visit st edward sussex suthida thai royal family tradition unfinished portrait united states united states of america wales welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:01 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×