Two Sicilies: rival claims, 2014 reconciliation and succession issues


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
They are criticized because they are too glitzy, and somewhat frivolous. Plus the fact that the Duke of Castro first made an agreement with the Calabria family, but then makes changes without discussing it with the Calabria family and stirring up mess.

The 2014 agreement between the Castros and Calabrias explicitly did not affect the family headship or its line of succession. Thus, the changes to the succession implemented by the head of the Castro branch were unrelated to the agreement.

https://www.constantinian.org.uk/wp...01/DUE-DUCHI-TWO-DUKES-Signed-Statements1.pdf

"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 recognized both branches' family membership and the titles of pretense they then used. The Calabria branch was the first to make changes to the agreed titles.
 
The 2014 agreement between the Castros and Calabrias explicitly did not affect the family headship or its line of succession. Thus, the changes to the succession implemented by the head of the Castro branch were unrelated to the agreement.

https://www.constantinian.org.uk/wp...01/DUE-DUCHI-TWO-DUKES-Signed-Statements1.pdf

"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 recognized both branches' family membership and the titles of pretense they then used. The Calabria branch was the first to make changes to the agreed titles.
I was speaking about their criticisms in general and did the Calabria branch agree with the Castro branch about his changes? No. Did the dynastic branch agree? No.
 
I was speaking about their criticisms in general and did the Calabria branch agree with the Castro branch about his changes? No.

I never said they did.

Neither branch agreed their post-2014 changes with the other branch.

Did the dynastic branch agree? No.

Both the Castros and the Calabrias recognized one another as dynastic branches in the 2014 agreement.
 
I never said they did.

Neither branch agreed their post-2014 changes with the other branch.



Both the Castros and the Calabrias recognized one another as dynastic branches in the 2014 agreement.

When I am referring to the dynastic branch, I was referring to third branch of the family who have married dynastically (the one married equally).
 
When I am referring to the dynastic branch, I was referring to third branch of the family who have married dynastically (the one married equally).
Which branch is it that you're referring to? The descendants of Prince Gabriele?
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
I didn't realise the Duke of Calabria made changes to his branch before the Duke of Castro changed his line of succession to include his daughters.

In that case did he believe that the agreement meant that the Castro line would keep their titles whilst they were alive but with the girls not inheriting anything (and being unable to inherit Grand Master) that his son Jamie would eventually become undisputed head? Because he is very angry in this 2016 statement.

https://royalmusingsblogspotcom.blogspot.com/2016/05/official-statement-from-hrh-duke-of.html
 
I didn't realise the Duke of Calabria made changes to his branch before the Duke of Castro changed his line of succession to include his daughters.

In that case did he believe that the agreement meant that the Castro line would keep their titles whilst they were alive but with the girls not inheriting anything (and being unable to inherit Grand Master) that his son Jamie would eventually become undisputed head? Because he is very angry in this 2016 statement.

https://royalmusingsblogspotcom.blogspot.com/2016/05/official-statement-from-hrh-duke-of.html
What changes did the Calabria branch make? I don’t see any from the the post you put up.
Your second paragraph is a perfect summary of the situation. But here’s the thing, there’s nothing to inherit as there’s no property in the Two Sicilies state apart from the fact that the Castro branch is rich due to Camilla’s family wealth. Jaimie would have been the undisputed head. The Castros have made serious mistakes in the Grand Order when he (Duke of Castro) sacked without informing Prince Augusto Ruffo di Calabria, a first cousin of King Philippe of Belgium and Marlene Eilers Koenig has made a report on it. Prince Augusto was a godparent to one of the Castro’s daughters and his wife has resigned from the orders.
 
I didn't realise the Duke of Calabria made changes to his branch before the Duke of Castro changed his line of succession to include his daughters.

In that case did he believe that the agreement meant that the Castro line would keep their titles whilst they were alive but with the girls not inheriting anything (and being unable to inherit Grand Master) that his son Jamie would eventually become undisputed head? Because he is very angry in this 2016 statement.

https://royalmusingsblogspotcom.blogspot.com/2016/05/official-statement-from-hrh-duke-of.html

It is difficult to tell what Pedro was thinking as his 2016 statement - in which he implies Carlo renounced his claim to the headship in 2014 - seems impossible to reconcile with the 2014 joint statement (which I quoted above) in which both Carlo and Pedro emphasized that "there is no mentioning of any references to the Headship" in their agreement.

However: The Castros considered the Calabrias (Jaime included) to be excluded from the line of succession to the headship. In order to recognize Jaime as undisputed head, they would still have needed to make changes to their line of succession (which Pedro claims they had no authority to do).

In summary: The Castro and Calabria branches share a common male-line ancestor in Prince Alfonso of the Two Sicilies, Count of Caserta. The Calabrias are descended in male line from the Count's second son Charles (who signed a renunciation in 1900 in preparation for marrying into the Spanish royal family), whereas the Castros are descended in male line from his fourth son Rainier. When the Count's eldest son, who was undisputed as the head of the house, died in 1960, Rainier and Charles's eldest son Alfonso each asserted a claim to the headship.

Had the Castros continued to exclude women and their descendants, Carlo would eventually have been succeeded as head by the male-line descendants of the Count of Caserta's seventh son Gabriel. (Some of the Count's other sons made unequal marriages.)


What changes did the Calabria branch make? I don’t see any from the the post you put up.

I'm sure Heavs was referring to my post, in which I mentioned the Calabria branch being the first to assume new titles after the 2014 agreement.

Your second paragraph is a perfect summary of the situation.

I don't think that is what he meant. My reading of the 2016 statement is that Pedro disapproved of Carlo making any pronouncements whatsoever about the succession (as that implies Carlo continues to hold himself out as head of the house with authority over the succession - which Pedro apparently perceives as contravening the "spirit" of the 2014 agreement), not that he expected Carlo to change the Castro succession in Jaime's favor.
 
Last edited:
Anyways, the succession is again disputed. I truly wonder who the Castro girls will marry?
 
Back
Top Bottom