Monarchy Forum
Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
azadi

Registered:
Posts: 633
Reply with quote  #1 
If the EU evolves into a federation, I want King Felipe of Spain to become the Emperor of Europe, because Spain is the largest monarchy in the Eurozone, and because King Felipe is a Bourbon and a descendant of the Habsburgs. The Bourbons and the Habsburgs are the greatest dynasties of continental Europe.
The Emperor of Europe must be a figurehead with limited political power. The legislative assembly of the European Federation must be a bicameral European Parliament. The lower house of the European Parliament shall be the Assembly of People's Deputies, which shall be directly elected by the citizens of the European Federation. The upper house of the European Parliament shall be the Senate, which shall be elected by the legislative assemblies of the member states of the European Federation. The head of government of the European Federation shall be the President of Government, who shall be appointed by the Emperor. The Assembly of People's Deputies shall be able to depose the President of Government with a vote of no confidence.
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,079
Reply with quote  #2 
Can't really see France going for that one.
Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,332
Reply with quote  #3 
Europe should be a crown dependency of Her Brittanic Majesty.
Murtagon

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 78
Reply with quote  #4 
The first thing that came to my mind when I saw the thread was this video by Matt Baker, the Canadian who makes charts depicting family trees of royals, as well as on other subjects. I admit that I have not seen it yet, but it seems that King Felipe V of Spain was declared worthiest of being "Emperor of Rome".

Did you know about this, Azadi?
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,079
Reply with quote  #5 
I wouldn't recommend anyone to bother with it. He bases Felipe VI's claim on Constantine XI having left his title by will to Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain, the Catholic Kings, with the suggestion that they had paid him so to do. Leaving aside the fact that such a will would have no legal force whatsoever, Isabella in 1453 was two years old and Ferdinand was only one. I don't think it altogether likely that Constantine XI would even know of their existence, let alone be using his prophetic powers to predict their marriage. And though certainly not averse to a spot of bribery in later years, I doubt they would have yet acquired the habit. History presented by the historically illiterate.
Murtagon

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 78
Reply with quote  #6 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
I wouldn't recommend anyone to bother with it. He bases Felipe VI's claim on Constantine XI having left his title by will to Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain, the Catholic Kings, with the suggestion that they had paid him so to do. Leaving aside the fact that such a will would have no legal force whatsoever, Isabella in 1453 was two years old and Ferdinand was only one. I don't think it altogether likely that Constantine XI would even know of their existence, let alone be using his prophetic powers to predict their marriage. And though certainly not averse to a spot of bribery in later years, I doubt they would have yet acquired the habit. History presented by the historically illiterate.


Thanks, you spared me half an hour. Also, sorry for inflicting this upon you, then.

Anyway, while I generally like his work, I still can't forget how he said after showing the main French pretenders "Vive la republique!", as if he couldn't comprehend that some have a better claim than others, so it's not like it's something that should just be swept under the rug, if you know what I mean.

As I only saw the graph, could you tell me why he shows Prince Andrew Romanov as the Russian heir and not Grand Duchess Maria? Because the former is a man and the latter isn't?

Finally, Baker may have meant Andreas Palaiologos instead. According to Wikipedia:
"Desperate for money, Andreas sold his rights to the Byzantine crown in 1494 to Charles VIII of France and later granted the same rights in his will to Ferdinand II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile. Andreas kept for himself only the title of Despot of the Morea, though he probably never received the money due for the sales of the imperial title. He died in poverty in Rome in 1502".

Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,079
Reply with quote  #7 
I didn't actually watch it past that bit, which was about 10 minutes in. So I don't know why Prince Andrew rather than Grand Duchess Maria. I expect that is where he got the will story from, especially as he does mention that the same 'rights' were sold to the French king also. And to be fair he didn't name the last Emperor, I did. So perhaps he considers Andreas to have been the last, though on what basis as he was never acclaimed and crowned and did not rule I wouldn't know. But if you say 'last Emperor' I think it is natural for people to assume Constantine XI is meant, and if it's someone else then you should specify who.
azadi

Registered:
Posts: 633
Reply with quote  #8 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murtagon


Thanks, you spared me half an hour. Also, sorry for inflicting this upon you, then.

Anyway, while I generally like his work, I still can't forget how he said after showing the main French pretenders "Vive la republique!", as if he couldn't comprehend that some have a better claim than others, so it's not like it's something that should just be swept under the rug, if you know what I mean.

As I only saw the graph, could you tell me why he shows Prince Andrew Romanov as the Russian heir and not Grand Duchess Maria? Because the former is a man and the latter isn't?

Finally, Baker may have meant Andreas Palaiologos instead. According to Wikipedia:
"Desperate for money, Andreas sold his rights to the Byzantine crown in 1494 to Charles VIII of France and later granted the same rights in his will to Ferdinand II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile. Andreas kept for himself only the title of Despot of the Morea, though he probably never received the money due for the sales of the imperial title. He died in poverty in Rome in 1502".


I consider the Tsars of Russia the legitimate heirs to the Eastern Roman Empire, while no legitimate heirs to the Western Roman Empire exists. The Carolingian Empire was a new empire, not a true successor to the Western Roman Empire. I support King Felipe becoming the Emperor of Europe, because he is the monarch of the largest monarchy in the EU, if Great Britain leaves the EU, and because he is a Bourbon and is descended from the Habsburgs. The Bourbons and the Habsburgs are the greatest dynasties of continental Western Europe.
I don't support any claimant to the Russian throne. I support a Zemskiy Sobor being allowed to elect the new Tsar of Russia from among the descendants of Rurik. The Zemskiy Sobor being allowed to elect a new Tsar, when the Russian throne is vacant, is an ancient Russian tradition. The first Romanov Tsar was elected by a Zemskiy Sobor. 
Murtagon

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 78
Reply with quote  #9 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
I didn't actually watch it past that bit, which was about 10 minutes in. So I don't know why Prince Andrew rather than Grand Duchess Maria. I expect that is where he got the will story from, especially as he does mention that the same 'rights' were sold to the French king also. And to be fair he didn't name the last Emperor, I did. So perhaps he considers Andreas to have been the last, though on what basis as he was never acclaimed and crowned and did not rule I wouldn't know. But if you say 'last Emperor' I think it is natural for people to assume Constantine XI is meant, and if it's someone else then you should specify who.


Yes, agreed.

To Azadi: Are you going to be dissapointed if a Romanov is elected Emperor? Actually, why do you insist that the Russian throne is vacant? Yes, Russia is a republic, but the succession is relatively straightforward. If you accept Paul I as Emperor, then you should also accept his legitimate and dynastic descendants.
azadi

Registered:
Posts: 633
Reply with quote  #10 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murtagon


Yes, agreed.

To Azadi: Are you going to be dissapointed if a Romanov is elected Emperor? Actually, why do you insist that the Russian throne is vacant? Yes, Russia is a republic, but the succession is relatively straightforward. If you accept Paul I as Emperor, then you should also accept his legitimate and dynastic descendants.

It's true, that Maria Vladimirovna has the strongest claim to the Russian throne according to the Pauline laws, but I dont want Russian monarchism to be shackled to an unpopular claimant. I'm not opposed to Maria Vladimirovna being elected Tsaritsa of Russia. She is a Russian patriot, who supported the reunification of Crimea with Russia, and she is a devout Orthodox Christian. But the Russian people ought to be allowed to elect the most popular descendant of Rurik Tsar of Russia. Descendants of Rurik through female lines ought to be eligible to be elected Tsar of Russia. According to reliable opinion polls, 28 % of the Russians support restoration of the monarchy, but only 6 % of the Russians support a Romanov restoration. A lot of Russian monarchists actually want Putin to be elected Tsar of Russia, including Sergey Aksyonov, the governor of Crimea, and Vsevolod Chaplin, a prominent Russian Orthodox cleric. Putin may be a descendant of Rurik through the Putyatin family. I admire Putin, and I want him to become the Tsar of Russia, if he is indeed a descendant of Rurik. I'm willing to accept any descendant of Rurik being elected Tsar of Russia by a Zemskiy Sobor.
If the Russian monarchy is restored, Russia ought to adopt male-preference primogeniture and allow the Tsar to marry a noblewoman or a commoner. The Tsar ought to marry a Russian. Most Russians are nationalists, who will prefer the Tsar marrying a Russian commoner to the Tsar marrying a foreign royal.
Windemere

Registered:
Posts: 426
Reply with quote  #11 
But if King Felipe of Spain were installed as European Emperor, due to his dual positions, I'd be concerned that it would lead to accusations of favoritism and conflict of interest.

I'd be inclined to go with Jean-Christophe, Prince Napoleon for European Emperor. He has a cosmopolitan background, and he could maintain the Bonapartist European continental traditions. (I haven't seen the video, as the computer I'm on has no audio capability).

__________________
Dis Aliter Visum "Beware of martyrs and those who would die for their beliefs; for they frequently make many others die with them, often before them, sometimes instead of them."
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.