Posted by Charles on 25/3/2011, 0:35:30, in reply to "Re: Plenty of political entities don't exist and titles are not changed"
User logged in as Charles
99.246.103.2
Let's remember cases like Michael of Romania where he was adamant that one could not alter the succession laws and then he "did" (although he really did not since he does not have the power to displace heirs under the old constitution). The same goes for the Margrave of Meissen who has tried to insert a cognatic relative of very dubious paternal royal lineage to the detriment of existing agnates of the entire Saxon princely house.
He was crown prince under a Yugoslav constitution and laws, not a Serbian one. End of that discussion because that is my point.
--Previous Message--
: Then Alexander is in the same boat as many
: other pretenders or heads of families where
: the constitution under the monarchies cannot
: be changed.
:
: Those constitutions are frozen in time and
: cannot be amended but time itself doesn't
: stand still and many of these heads of
: families do change their house laws all the
: time and many of these hose laws were
: written into their constitutions.
:
: Do you begrudge heads of other families
: changing house laws in regards to equality
: of marriages and the regulation of titles.
:
: Also, there is no law that has legal binding
: that says he cannot change the place
: designation he states he is from.
:
:
: --Previous Message--
: It's a title he never had. He doesn't have
: to
: use a territorial designation in Serbia
: anyway. The Serbian people are also well
: aware than until very, very recently they
: were not an independent nation and that
: their royalty had been removed long before.
:
: Since there is no monarchy the last
: monarchical constitution is always the force
: of royal law. There is no fine line with
: picking and choosing.
:
: --Previous Message--
: Since there is no monarchy to regulate
: titles
: and Yugoslavia no longer exists and his best
: chance of a restoration is in Serbia where
: he has some standing there why begrudge him
: reverting to an older title if it may
: increase his chances of a restoration?
:
: --Previous Message--
: Yes. He is not a reigning monarch and he is
: not the son of a King of Serbia. He is the
: son of a king of Yugoslavia.
:
: --Previous Message--
: So are you saying he doesn't have the power
: or
: authority to change his title?
:
: --Previous Message--
: Well, his father was never King of Serbia.
: He
: can pretend to be its crown prince if he
: wants but that's not his real title.
:
: --Previous Message--
: Yes, but the royal family of Yugoslavia was
: originally Serbian so with that state
: defunct it makes more sense for him to align
: himself with his Serbian roots.
:
: As Gary said, Alexander has a semi-official
: status in Serbia and it just would not serve
: his purpose as a representative of the
: Serbian people and monarchy if he was still
: hanging on to the "of Yugoslavia"
: designation.
:
: --Previous Message--
: Serbia was merged into Yugoslavia during the
: time of monarchy.
:
: --Previous Message--
: --Previous Message--
: True. But I don't blame Alexander for going
: back to his Serbian roots because he does
: have a better chance for a restoration by
: aligning himself that way.
:
: Yes. He is not only heir to the kings of
: Yugoslavia, but also to the Karadjordjovic
: kings of Serbia. Since both thrones are
: equally extinct, I hardly see what
: difference it makes to which he pretends.
:
: On the other hand, there is a Republic of
: Serbia and it does accord the Crown Prince a
: sort of semi-official status. In this sense
: he is more "of Serbia" than he is
: of the defunct Yugoslavia.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
