Succession to the Romanian Throne, Part 1

[JR76]

With opinions like that I'm a bit surprised you're here at all. While many of us disagree on a lot of things and the debates can get quite heated from time to time, we're united in our interest in both the historical and modern aspects of monarchy but you only seem to be here to one time after another criticise and bad mouth both the monarchical system and the people being part of it.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app

[NotHRH]

If the US had a royal family, I probably would not be on this website. I do enjoy reading about all sorts of things, but especially people. But I cannot stand a whining (William) or a begging (ex-royals wanting 'their' throne back) royal. Switch places and then they can all take a breather. Does anybody else see the irony/contrast between these two situations?

[Cory]

Originally Posted by NotHRH

My point (made in one of my earlier posts) is if Romania wants to restore their monarchy, the government of Romania will seek out their former royal family and restore them to the throne. It's really sad this family is still looking for a very expensive handout. They actually want Romanian citizens to support them again - wow! Unbelievable! It is so easy to spend money that you didn't earn yourself. This "royal" family should have been earning their own living for years now. You CANNOT change the past and no one knows what the future holds. Romania to their former royals: don't call us, we'll call you.

As far the US political system - it is NOT anywhere near perfect, it's not even in the same universe as "perfection." But granted, we have a system of checks and balances, not just amongst the 3 branches of govt - executive, judicial, legislative- but also between the 2 major political parties, and between the American people and the US federal government as a whole. We have a presidential election in November, and so far, Donald Trump is leading in all the polls and also in the primaries. The working class is tired of the govt doling out our hard-earned money (from taxes we pay based on our earnings) to lazy people that do nothing all day. In effort to make everybody happy, our govt is realizing that it is NOT possible for that to be. One group will always be unhappy. Anyway, royalty is just a type of welfare system - an extremely expensive one paid to a family that feels it is their right to take, and live lavishly while doing so. A royal family here would be taken out (sadly) in a similar way the Imperial Russian family was murdered, but it would probably be much more brutal and horrific. Our lives here would never allow one family throughout the centuries to become immensely wealthy from the sweat of our collective brow, especially when their role is ceremonial (=they did nothing to earn it). To me it's laughable that people who live in countries with a monarchy find that acceptable - I really do not understand that and NEVER will.

If the Monarchy will be restored in Romania the first option is to offen the Throne to the Hohenzollern who represent the Succession to the Throne according to the royalist constotutional tradition of Romania. If the Hohenzollerns refuse itvthan there is the possibiliy of another Royal Family.

[Cory]

Do you understand there are clear Succession rules (all the Romanisn royal Constitutions) which indicate he Hohenzollerns as Heirs if the King does not have sons or brothers? Those rules can be changed only by Parliament. So after King Michael his daughters and their descendants do not have dynastic rights.
It is rather weird that people that respect the rules of Succession for other non reigning Royal Houses ignore the rules of Succession of the Romanian Royal House .

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by Cory

[...]
It is rather weird that people that respect the rules of Succession for other non reigning Royal Houses ignore the rules of Succession of the Romanian Royal House .

Amen to that!

[JR76]

It is rather weird that people fail to grasp that, in most probabilities, if there is a restoration of the monarchy it won't be based on an old prewar constitution but on a completely new one. If the monarchy is restored it will be because the Romanian people feel that King Michael, or in reality Crown Princess Margaritha, are best suited to carry the office of Head of State and in such an eventuality it will be based on the affection people have for their family and their abilities. In such a case for the people to allow the crown to instead be transferred to a family that has no descent what so ever from the former ruling family is highly improbable and I must say pure fantasy.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app

[Cory]

Originally Posted by JR76

It is rather weird that people fail to grasp that, in most probabilities, if there is a restoration of the monarchy it won't be based on an old prewar constitution but on a completely new one. If the monarchy is restored it will be because the Romanian people feel that King Michael, or in reality Crown Princess Margaritha, are best suited to carry the office of Head of State and in such an eventuality it will be based on the affection people have for their family and their abilities. In such a case for the people to allow the crown to instead be transferred to a family that has no descent what so ever from the former ruling family is highly improbable and I must say pure fantasy.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app

The Hohenzollerns are descendants in direct male line from the brothers of Carol I of Romania.
Who would support some English or French ladies only because their granfather was a King of Romania but they do not have any connection with the country and no dynastic rights?

[MAfan]

If things don't change and stay a they are, we have on a side the Princes of Hohenzollern who do not have any interest in Romania, on the other side there is a clear possible successor (Princess Margarita), who has some credit, lives in Romania, speaks Romanian, is involved in many activities in Romania, has an active role and possibly an interest in the restoration of the monarchy.
In a longer period, the Hohenzollern line of succession would remain clearer, but still unlikely; the "Michaelist" line of succession, instead, is somehow unclear and for that reason equally unlikely.

[Cory]

The Hohenzollerns have never formally given up their dynastic rights to the Throne. It was only HH Prince Karl who said he was not extremely interested few tears ago. He was speaking about himself not about all the Hohenzollerns.

HH Prince Karl can give up his dynastic rights in favour of other Prince of Hohenzollern. There are enough Princes in the Hoenzollern House.
I have to remind the constitutional Line of Succession eac time people speak about another "Line" that has nothing to do with the rotal Constitutions of the Kingdom of Romania.

[MAfan]

Yes, but as you constantly remind us he is the first in the "constitutional" line of succession and he is the heir presumptive after King Michael. Not all the other Hohenzollers. Even if all the other Hohenzollerns were interested in the Romanian succession, it would be Prince Karl the only one entitled to take decisions after King Michael's death about the Romanian succession.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by MAfan

If things don't change and stay a they are, we have on a side the Princes of Hohenzollern who do not have any interest in Romania, on the other side there is a clear possible successor (Princess Margarita), who has some credit, lives in Romania, speaks Romanian, is involved in many activities in Romania, has an active role and possibly an interest in the restoration of the monarchy.
In a longer period, the Hohenzollern line of succession would remain clearer, but still unlikely; the "Michaelist" line of succession, instead, is somehow unclear and for that reason equally unlikely.

Princess Margareta is just the eldest daughter of the King and she has no dynastic rights according to the Constitutions of the Kingdom of Romania. She and her sister Princess Mary live in Romania and do not have children. The others sisters and their descendance do not live in the country,are not envolved in the life of the Romanian society and do not speak Romanian.

[Chubb Fuddler]

Originally Posted by NotHRH

To me it's laughable that people who live in countries with a monarchy find that acceptable - I really do not understand that and NEVER will.

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.

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by JR76

With opinions like that I'm a bit surprised you're here at all. While many of us disagree on a lot of things and the debates can get quite heated from time to time, we're united in our interest in both the historical and modern aspects of monarchy but you only seem to be here to one time after another criticise and bad mouth both the monarchical system and the people being part of it.

Interest is not synonymous with approval.

[Cory]

There is no poll regarding who the people consider as future Heir to the Throne.

[Jacknch]

Please note that the merits or otherwise of having a monarchy/republic can be discussed in the following thread:

http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums...-12736-17.html

[Cory]

Those that support a proposal of Line of Succession contrary to the Constitutions of the Kingdom of Romania forget there is no grandchild of nowadays Monarch who lives in the country.

[Benjamin]

Originally Posted by Cory

Those that support a proposal of Line of Succession contrary to the Constitutions of the Kingdom of Romania forget there is no grandchild of nowadays Monarch who lives in the country.

No one has forgotten what happened to Prince Nicholas, who, by the way, did live in Bucharest for years as well as speak the language.

Many realize that the young man embodies the hope for a future of the royal family in Romania.

Some ardent royalists do not agree with the decision that was taken in August.

[Cory]

Mr Medforth Mills was supported by many royalists because he was the only descendant of the King who could bring continuity. Now that chapter is closed. The proposed Lone of the Ki g does not really have any future.

[LadyRohan]

Originally Posted by Chubb Fuddler

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.

This is a very good way of summing up the status quo.
The greater cause is the debate of monarchy vs. republic, and it is natural to assume that most people on monarchical forums, with a few visible exceptions, are in favour of monarchical restorations wherever possible, and believe in the virtues of monarchies as a form of government.
If that basis is shared, the question becomes how one best drives the cause forward, and which person(s) can best promote the interest of monarchy in any given country.

I don't know who will be asked to assume the throne in Romania if it is restored, and neither does anyone else on these forums, but I do know this: If one thinks that the world will return to 70 years ago, and that a monarchy in Europe will be restored bypassing women because they're women, and an old line of succession said so in days long gone, they should have another think about it.

The facts are clear, most politicians say it straight out, that if they started from scratch and were choosing a government today, with little or no historical links to a certain family, they would not choose a monarchy as its basis. As a monarchist, I still understand that, because to many, it is both an illogical construct, and for politicians, it removes one of the ways they can achieve power, through a precidency.

However, when there are existing monarchies that function, or in countries where there are former royal families actively working, discreetly intermixing in the fabric of society, there is a chance of changing the system of government to what it once was, but that change is based on the people that advocate it, who represent it towards the public. In Romania, that is the Royal Family.

Yes, the King has 5 daughters and no sons. 70-80 years ago, that might have been an issue, and if the monarchy had not been abolished, maybe, just maybe they would had been sidelined and a male from the house of Hohenzollern would had been summoned after King Michael would pass away.

Does anyone genuinely believe that? If the Royal House was still ruling in Romania, in 2016, King Michael still being alive, Romania being a modern and Westernized country in the EU, would the politicians not have changed the constitution to allow for female succession, so that Margareta would have assumed the throne after her father?

This is the real world we live in. Restoring a monarchy is an uphill climb in todays world. It takes an incredible effort both on the part of the family, it takes political bravery and a PR-machine to sell it to the public, but most of all, it requires support by those who actually favour a monarchy.

That is where I get lost in this debate, where one bludgeons the other with facts about ancient lines of succession etc. Nobody doubts what the line of succession said in 1947, before the monarchy was abolished.

What I, and most others, ask on these forums, and in our discussions with Romanian friends and others, is what is realistic today. Do we try to restore the monarchy based on the people who represent the heritage, the family and the former King, or do we build a new monarchy, and find a Prince from the old house that provided the first King in the 19th century?

The old constitution is dead, as is the line of succession. There is no dome over the monarchy, as Duc wrote in an earlier post in this thread, because that is not how the world works. An institution, a construct of any kind that refuses to update, to adapt and to change when necessary, has no survivability in our world today, or in the rapidly changing world of tomorrow.

That is where it stands, and that forms the basis of what is possible to achieve. That is what King Michael tried to express when he wrote a document under his own seal, that he encouraged parliament to consider.

Many ask monarchists to be realistic. That is realism in action. The world has changed. The King knows that. People and politicians know that. We need to know that as well, if the goal of seeing the monarchy return to Romania, is to happen at all.

[Cory]

Obviously you do not know Romania too much if you suppose Romanian would ignore not only the Constitutions of the Kingdom but also long established traditions.
If you were also realistic you would notice no grandchild of the King lives in the country and so the King's descendants are not really linked with the country except the two daughters of the King that are childless.