Savoy and Savoy-Aosta: Restoration, Succession, Heirs and Conflicts 1: Ending 2022


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
Emanuele Filiberto is a personal friend of the Prince of Monaco, so it's likely that he and Clotilde will be invited ar Albert and Charlene's wedding.

If I remeber correctly, Albert even was Emanuele Filiberto's witness at his wedding to Clotilde.
 
Conte di said:
Restoration is only a family dream. If it were to happen, Vitt Emanuele IV would never be king. Filberto has a better chance if at all. As a family member I would support a restoration of course but not with just any Savoia on the throne.
Click to expand...

I'm not that well informed about the succession issues in Italy but why does everyone think that Filiberto has better chances? He doesn't have a male heir whereas Aimone does have a son now. So my question would be, does all this have to do with North Italy vs South Italy? We all know about the cultural difference between the 2 parts of the country, does this affect even the issues regarding the restoration of the monarchy and the succession?
 
MPD1 said:
I'm not that well informed about the succession issues in Italy but why does everyone think that Filiberto has better chances? He doesn't have a male heir whereas Aimone does have a son now. So my question would be, does all this have to do with North Italy vs South Italy? We all know about the cultural difference between the 2 parts of the country, does this affect even the issues regarding the restoration of the monarchy and the succession?
Click to expand...

It's not a North v South issue but a purely dynastic one. One line is the direct inheritor of the Savoy kings of Italy, whereas the other (Aosta) descends from Amadeo, who was King of Spain for five years.

Prior to Unification, Italy was comprised of a myriad of kingdoms, duchies and republics. Many of these states disappeared with time (such as the ancient republics of Venice and Genoa), as consolidation took place resulting from the French Revolution and the Congress of Vienna. Only San Marino has preserved independence today, while the Vatican was only formally established by the Concordat in 1929.

The states that existed immediately before unification were:

  • Kingdom of Sardinia, ruled by the House of Savoy. Piedmont and Sardinia had been in union since the 18th century.
  • Kingdom of Lombardy-Venetia, basically comprising the lands of the former Duchy of Milan and Venetian Republic, ruled by Austria.
  • Duchy of Parma, ruled by the House of Bourbon
  • Duchy of Modena, ruled by the Austria-Este line
  • Grand Duchy of Tuscany, ruled by the House of Habsburg
  • Papal States, ruled by the Pope
  • Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, ruled by the House of Bourbon. Naples and Sicily were "merged" in 1816. This is the region collectively known as "the South".
The Savoy dispute is a dynastic dispute rather than a regional one. There are monarchists supporting either of the Savoy lines, but there are also regional monarchists supporting the regional royal lines- of which the Two Sicilies monarchists are the biggest. The Two Sicilies monarchists also tend to be anti-Savoy for historical reasons, because of Unification (they feel the Two Sicilies was a country that was conquered from Turin). It was also why relations between the Catholic Church and the Kingdom of Italy were strained before the 1929 Concordat. Regional monarchism has also cast itself within a wider Italian and European phenomenon of regionalism.
 
Last edited:
I have a question and would like some opinions. I'm sorry to be morbid, but after VE and his Aosta cousin have passed, would chances for reconciliation between the two Houses be greater? Could EF and Aimone come to terms or is the animosity between the families too great and ingrained?
Thanks in advance for your responses.:flowers:
 
Alas , they are so different. One on TV highlight One in the shadow!
Why pictures of VE and the two little kenyan boys and pictures of Umberto of Aosta at the same time.
Aimone married a Princess and has a son ; VE married a french actress and has two girls.
The only thing similar is that the two brides were pregnant on their wedding day;
 
Prince Aimone and Princess Olga are very respected but maybe less known than the actor.
 
wow thats quite something!!!! thats actually a lot in my point of view!
maybe its a new start for it to actually happen in the future?
 
Maybe inn few years there could be some chances with Prince Aimone.
 
The italian royalists are organised all over the country by UMI (www.monarchia.it ) and they try to speak to all the social classes but especially to the youth.

Here a nice photo with the leaders of UMI (Unione Monarchica Italiana) and the leaders of the Youth Monarchical Front:


U.M.I. - Unione Monarchica Italiana - News
 
I'd like to inform me someone, why prince Amadeo had the right to stay in Italia, and Vittorio Emmanuale didn't...i'm a little bit confused:)
 
The transitory and final provision XIII of the Italian Constitution provided for the exile of the ex-kings of the House of Savoy, their consorts and their male descendants.
The ex-Kings were Vittorio Emanuele III and Umberto II, their consorts were Queen Elena and Queen Maria José, their male descendants were in 1948 (when the Constitution came in force) just Vittorio Emanuele and since 1972 also Emanuele Filiberto.
All the other members of the Royal Family were excluded from this provisin and therefore were allowed to stay in Italy. In particular, in 1948 Amedeo was just a 5 years old and harmless baby, considering his young age he couldn't cause any harm to the recently born and somehow frail Republic; and his mother, his aunt Princess Anne and his grandmother Princess Hélène were all highly respected in Italy. Therefore there wasn't any reason for forcing them to the exile.

Also the Duke of Genova and his brother the Duke of Bergamo could remain in Italy.
 
Thanks a lot! Yes, i knew about the exile of the ex-kings of the House of Savoy, their consorts and their male descendants. But also the now Vittorio Emanuele was a harmless boy in 1949...i still don't understand why he wasn't excluded from the law...just because he was the heir?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, exactly, because he was the son and heir to the King.
 
Vittorio-Emanuele di Savoia was Heir to the Throne of Italy between 1946-1969/1971.
 
MAfan said:
Yes, exactly, because he was the son and heir to the King.
Click to expand...

Yes but after all,he was just a kid, just like Amedeo...and now, Amedeo seems to be the Head of the Royal House of Italy...
 
Nobody says the XIII disposition of the Italian Constitution of 1948 was right.Now Vittorio-Emanuele and Emanuele-Filiberto di Savoia can live in Italy without problems.
Prince Amedeo became Head of the Royal House of Savoy only because Vittorio-Emanuele married without the agreement of King Umberto II.
 
Yes, i know, allthought i don't know how valid is that change. After all, Vittorio Emanuele is the son of the last king, and is without point to argue about something that doesn't exists anymore...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The laws of succession are automatic.If Vittorio-Emanuele married without King's agreement he lost immediately his right for him and for his male descendance.
Today we don't have a Throne of Italy that's why Prince Amedeo is only Head of the Royal House of Savoy and not King.
 
Cory said:
The laws of succession are automatic.If Vittorio-Emanuele married without King's agreement he lost immediately his right for him and for his male descendance.
Today we don't have a Throne of Italy that's why Prince Amedeo is only Head of the Royal House of Savoy and not King.[/QUOT

In my oppinion, there are laws of succession, if there is a Kingdon. VE married when there was no Kingdom...And calling someone King without him crowned, it's a little bit ridiculous...That's not serious...ok, once heir's father died as a King, but this doesn't make him King...
Click to expand...
 
Even if we speak about a non reigning Royal House the Laws of Succession remained the same.King Umberto II never changed them.
 
I suppose there is no Royal Decree granting any title to Mr.Emanuele-Filiberto di Savoia .So why does he call himself prince of Venice?

There is no Decree granting any title to the son of Vittorio-Emanuele di Savoia (Prince of Naples from 1937-1970 and Crown Prince of Italy between 1946-1970). So Emanuele-Filiberto has no title at all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It seems there isn't any decree granting the title.
Vittorio Emanuele and Emanuele Filiberto claim that King Umberto II conferred orally the title of Prince of Venice to Emanuele Filiberto on occasion of his christening.
This is quite odd, because the King usually issued a decree when conferring titles; so why didn't he do that time too? And if, on the contrary, he did and somewhere there is a decree granting the title to Emanuele Filiberto, why it has never been showed up? If such a decree existed, it would be one of the best evidences of the rightfulness of Vittorio Emanuele and Emanuele Filiberto's claims.
 
How are things standing nowadays related to the possibility of an italian restoration? Are the italian royalists strong?
What is the people's oppinion?
 
The royalists represent only a minority and the members of the Royal Family are not known enough.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

CrownPrincessJava
  • Sticky
Italy: Birthday and Anniversary Wishes 2024
Replies
4
Views
411
CyrilVladisla
CyrilVladisla
Blog Real
King Carlo Emanuele III (1701-1773) and Wives
Replies
1
Views
344
CyrilVladisla
CyrilVladisla
MAfan
Savoy and Savoy-Aosta: Restoration, Succession, Heirs and Conflicts 2: 2022 -
2
Replies
52
Views
4K
maria-olivia
maria-olivia
Blog Real
King Vittorio Emanuele I (1759-1824) and Queen Maria Teresa of Austria-Este
Replies
2
Views
491
Blog Real
Blog Real
Blog Real
King Vittorio Emanuele II and wifes (Adelaide of Austria​ and Rosa Vercellana)
Replies
3
Views
648
Linda_26
Linda_26

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom