The Bourbons, Hapsburgs, Hohenzollerns, and Romanovs (and add any other families you like) undoubtedly have a number of living descendants, many of whom must be patiently waiting for the people of Europe to get over this democracy nonsense and demand the return of benevolent monarchical rule. Is there at least consensus among the living generations as to which of them is first in line as the rightful successor, come the longed-for Restoration?
The Romanovs were murdered on 17 July 1918. Before any of the Tsar’s children produced an heir.
I don’t think there is a direct heir to Russia’s monarchy?
Sometimes, yes:
Hohenzollerns - Georg Friedrich, Prince of Prussia
Habsburgs - Karl von Habsburg
Sometimes, no:
Romanovs - Nicholas Romanov, Prince of Russia
Bourbon - Louis Alphonse, Duke of Anjou
In the Romanov case it is a question of legitimacy of descent. In the Bourbon case leadership of house Bourbon is uncontested far as I know, but claims to the French throne is by rival houses.
For the Hapsburg and Hohenzollerns, it’s fairly easy. The man who would be Emperor of Austria is Karl von Hapsburg, a businessman/venture capitalist who is the oldest son of Otto von Hapsburg, who was himself the oldest son of Emperor Charles.
For the Hohenzollerns, it’s George Friedrich, a businessman who is the great great grandson of the Kaiser.
The rightful heir to the throne does not need to be a direct descendant of the last monarch. Not sure why you would think that.
Uh, because Prince Charles is next in line behind the Queen. William comes after Charles and then someday Prince George is destined to be king.
Charlotte and Harry are the first two spare heirs if needed.
Succession to the throne is very clearly defined.
But this doesn’t mean that they need to be a direct descendant of the last monarch to be the rightful heir. If, for example, Bolsheviks murdered the first 44 members in line to the British throne it would rightfully go to this guy who is the Queen’s cousin and not her direct descendant.
I wasn’t aware of that.
Ignorance fought.
Its always good to learn something new.
Yes, but if the monarch dies without children then sucessio9n can pass to a brother, cousin, nephew, second cousin, great nephew, etc.
Hence why he said, the rightful heir to the throne does not need to be a direct descendant of the last monarch.
Edit - ninja’d
Note that the word “rightful” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. What makes a monarch the rightful monarch? If you’re the heir of the previous monarch? Sure, but plenty of kings and queens have ruled kingdoms and not been the heir of the previous monarch. And what makes you the heir, anyway? The law of the society you live in. So what exactly is the difference between countries with laws specifying the heir of the current monarch, but which would be changed (do sons always come before daughters? Do daughters come before cousins? Do illegitimate children count?) and a law passed by the government that just says that such and such a person is the new monarch?
Meaning, if France decided to become a monarchy again, who says that the head of the house of Bourbon would rightfully be that monarch? Why not an heir of Napoleon? Or me? I’m between jobs right now and could use the work.
A monarch is only the “rightful monarch” if people clap hard enough to make them the rightful monarch. If the people don’t believe in fairies anymore, then they stop being the rightful monarch.
And in the Russian case, it gets complicated because of a lot of questions over:[ol]
[li]Whether Nicholas, when he abdicated in March 1917, also had the right to abdicate on behalf of his son[/li][li]Whether or not the refusal of Grand Duke Michael, in whose favor Nicholas abdicated, to accept the throne was meaningful[/li][li]The fact that Michael had no legitimate heirs from an equal marriage[/li][li]The Pauline rules that severely limit the conditions under which women can inherit or pass succession on to their children[/li][li]Whether a marriage between a Romanov dynast and a Georgian princess in 1948 is considered an equal marriage for dynastic purposes[/li][/ol]
The appropriate term is pretender. Although I don’t think Chrissie Hynde’s in line to inherit anything.
Realistically, none of those countries is dying to bring back a monarch and none of the “rightful” heirs feels any great calling.
IF the monarchy were restored anywhere… I’d vote Russia. Putin is all about “Autocracy, Orthodoxy and Nationality.” I could see him deciding that a new tsar was just the thing to inspire a new burst of patriotism.
BTW, as a Borbon/Bourbon, would Spain’s king Juan Carlos have any claim to be king of France?
Also remember that the Bonapartes have their claim to the French throne. The current pretender in that line is Jean-Christophe, Prince Napoléon, who is 20 years old.
Jean-Christophe’s father, Prince Charles, is still alive, however, and some Bonapartists refuse to accept that Charles’s father, Prince Louis Bonaparte, passed over Charles to name Jean-Christophe as the rightful heir (he didn’t like Charles’s republican sympathies). Charles has said he will never fight his son for the rights.
Ironically, Jean-Christophe is also descended from Louis Phillippe, the last Bourbon monarch, although through a female line, which precludes him from claiming the rights to that line.
My favorite little monarchist tidbit is that Simeon II, the last Tsar of Bulgaria, who lost his throne in 1946, became the Prime Minister of a fully democratic Bulgaria in 2001, as Simeon Saxe-Coburg-Gotha (or Sakskoburggotski, in Bulgarian).
Is it just me or does “Napoléon VII” kind of look like Justin Trudeau.
Or Her Majesty’s own father; George VI. He inherited the throne from his brother, Edward VIII, who abdicated without issue.
France has a fourth one, Henri: Henri, Count of Paris (1933–2019) - Wikipedia
It depends on if you consider Louis-Philippe legitimate. I think this generally means that Henri’s claim is more widely accepted than Louis Alphonse’s, n’est-ce pas?
UK still has a Jacobite claimant, now a German guy who doesn’t press his claim very much.
She could use her, her, her, imagination.