And I am the King of Spartacus. And Spain. And France. And that guy’s left foot. No, that guy, the one over there, next to the fire hose closet, reading the racing form.
Say hi to Lisa for me.
So, Louis père…?
Who is.
Nicholas II, not Alexander. Nicholas had a couple of brothers, most of which died young, except for Michail, who was also killed in 1918. Nicholas also had two sisters, Xeniaand Olga, both of whom died in 1960.
Xenia, the oldest one, had 7 kids, all of which have passed away, but some of their descendants are still alive - their DNA was used when Nicholas II was exhumed in 1991 (or so Wikipedia tells me). Olga, the younger sister, had two sons who have died - not sure if they had children
Dammit! I could have sworn it was Louis the 14th. . . but I stand corrected.
And this is a big hurdle in my original question–I’m sure the Russians have different rules of succession than the Scots do, who have different than the Japanese, who have different from the Mongols, etc.
And given there’s some pretenders out there, I have to wonder if there are legitimate rulers that aren’t really in any governmental power (i.e. the Revolution “stuck” and they’re just nice nobles to have around for sentiment) but still exist. For instance, assuming Anastasia had survived and fled into exile, and the Bolsheviks take over anyway. After the Soviets’ fall, her kids return but aren’t reinstated into power–they’re acknowledged, but nothing more.
. . . and on preview, I see that Švejk, you’ve kind of answered a question! But has anyone “out of curiosity” traced Xenia’s kids’ bloodline and informally declared them the legitimate heirs to what’s left of a throne?
Tripler
I mean, royalty is nice to have. . .in a box on a shelf.
I’m related by marriage to Eleazer Williams (my great^n aunt married him), who was one of the many “Lost Dauphin” claimants.
My problems claiming being the King of France:
- EW probably wasn’t the Lost Dauphin
- I’m only related by marriage
- There would be many people ahead of me
- France doen’t have a king
Brian
She’s unspeakable.
Well played!
I’ve always heard that many of the problems the Bourbons had were caused by their ability to never forget an insult and never remember a favor. Sort of self defeating over the long run.
I didn’t know this myself but I did some googling and found out there’s a number of monarchist groups* currently in Russia. One of them points to grand duchess Mariya Vladimirovna, whose claim to power is that her grandfather (Cyril Vladimirovich), Nicholas II’s cousin, claimed to be the rightful heir to the throne in 1924, something that is disputed by the people mentioned in my earlier post.
There is also this guy, who claims the Russian throne on some basis that is not clear to me - everybody in his branch of the family is named Nikolay, it’s like a goddam novel by Garcia Marquez.
*There’s Monarchist, the Russian Imperial Union-Order, and the Russian Monarchist Movement (RMD). They all support Mariya Vladimirovna.
Maria Vladimirovna, Grand Duchess of Russia is the current pretender to the Russian throne, but her claim is disputed (including by other Romanovs). The Russian Empire used semi-salic law. This means that the throne can only pass to males through the male-line unless the male-line goes extinct in which case the nearest female relative of the last male can inheirit. The Romanov have technically gone extict in the male-line (again) because of unequal marriages contracted by male dynasts since the Revolution which caused them to lose their succession rights.
He’s Nicholas I’s great-great grandson. Nicholas I had a son named Nicholas, who had a son named Peter, who had a son named Roman, who had him.
The difference between a pretender and a legitimate ruler is pretty much just a matter of opinion. All a pretender is is somebody who would be king if the nation’s monarchy hadn’t fallen. But if you’re interested, here’s Tsar Simeon II of Bulgaria, who was deposed in 1944 when the Soviets occupied the country, fled into exile, and then, after the Bulgarian Communist government fell, returned to Bulgaria, ran for Parliament, and became Prime Minister.
Also, Fuad II of Egypt is still alive and living in Switzerland.
The longer a royal family is out of power, the more tenuous the claims of pretenders become. Quite apart from the obvious fact that restoration becomes increasingly unlikely with the passage of time, there is the problem that it is no longer clear who – if anyone – has power to determine or alter the rules of succession.
For instance, it was commonly the case with many ruling families that anyone who married morganatically (i.e. married a commoner) took himself outside the line of succession. Fair enough when you are cashed up and in power; there is no shortage of eligible minor royals willing to entertain the prospect of marrying you. But it’s a different matter when you are trying to maintain your pretensions of grandeur while living above a fish-and-chip shop in a provincial Portuguese town.
So, the head of the family may change the rules, and decide that you can marry a commoner and still be in line to become head of the family yourself. But does this operate to change the rules of succession to the now entirely notional throne of Whereveristan? Your cousin, who is next in line of succession after you, may well feel that it doesn’t.
A similar situation can arise if a royal family historically excluded from succession the children of second marriages following divorce, or members who acquired the nationality of another country, or whatever.
Then you can have a person in line of succession who accepts reality and says that, yes, he is the head of the family, but he makes no claim to the throne, because there is no throne. Others may see this as an abdication, leaving the way open for the next in line to claim the throne.
Hence the phenomenon of several different pretenders. The one body which has the authority to determine the succession to the throne of Whereveristan – the actual government of Whereveristan – is not going to arbitrate between them, since its position is that there is no throne of Whereveristan, and therefore no question to arbitrate.
How’s the humble pie?
Well, I didn’t vote for him.
Allen Sherman on the causes of the French Revolution (It’s worth noting that the introduction is sung to the Marseillaise.)
Tangentially related question – I just finished a novel set in France and references were made to “First Empire” this and that. Was there a Second Empire?
(Apologies for my ignorance of French history)
The First Empire (although it was just called the Empire at the time) was Napoleon Bonaparte’s reign from 1804 to 1815 (with a short break in 1814). The Second Empire was when Napoleon’s nephew, Napoleon III (aka Charles-Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte) restored Bonapartist rule from 1852 to 1870.
In case you’re wondering Napoleon II was Napoleon Francois Joseph Charles Bonaparte, son of the original Napoleon and Archduchess Marie Louise of Austria. Napoleon II never ruled France (he was a Duke of a small town in Austria) but was counted for dynastic reasons.
Ancien Regime: from Carolingian/earlies Capetian times, ca. 800-970, until 1789. (Constitutional monarchy under various regimes 1789-92)
(First) Republic, including Consulate: 1792-1804
(First) Empire: 1804-1814, 100 days in 1815
Bourbon Restoration, 1814-15, 1815-30, replaced by the Bourbon-Orleans ‘citizen king’ Louis Philippe 1830-48.
Second Republic. 1848-52
Second Empire, 1852-70
Third Republic, 1870-1940
Etat Francaise (Vichy) and a Committee governing the Free French, 1940-42 (Vichy) and -45 (FF)
Fourth Republic, 1946-58
Fifth Republic, 1958- present