The European Royals Message Board
[ Post a response | The European Royals Message Board ]
User logged in as Johan
Posted by Johan on 21/7/2020, 6:45:54, in reply to "Great Britain
So to you the same thing applies to all former reigning dynasties who have changed the rules or laws since loosing their thrones.
Because if you don't accept a dynasty's/pretender's power to alter the rules after they lost their throne in Russia then you cannot accept alterations in other former reigning houses either. Meaning that future successions in the houses of Austria/Hungary, Bavaria, Anhalt and Weimar are going to divert from what you think should be the line and that the successions in Romania and Saxony are not real either. Unfortunately for you, you don't have that kind of power. The power lies with the nations their ancestors once ruled as well as with the Houses and the other dynasties reigning and non-reigning. It's their acceptance that determines if a change in rules is effective.
In the cases of Romania and Saxony we've seen the altered rules accepted. Archduke Ferdinand Zvonimir is the accepted heir of his father even though his mother Francesca is not from one of the shortlisted families that could marry a Habsburg dynastically and her status is comparable to countess Sophie Chotek. Had the rules that Otto applied to his son Karl and Francesca been applied previously the house of Hohenberg would have been the main line in Austria/Hungary.
As for hypocrisy. If the current rules of succession in the UK would have been applied from say George I the current Queen would never have been the monarch. Does that mean that altering the UK succession to gender neutral is hypocritical as well?
You're missing the point, which I've stressed elsewhere: the British royals were and are reigning dynasty. Succession by the order of male-preferred primogeniture was the law of the land until 2013, when it changed to fully cognatic primogeniture.
The said change was perfectly legitimate, since an enthroned house is entitled to change its succession laws on any terms -- making it retroactive, if necessary, and without any consideration for consistency with past traditions. We have seen this in a number of other reigning dynasties of Europe.
Russia is different: I'm not saying anything against change per se. What I'm speaking out against is an attempt to change something that's closed -- in this case, the Fundamental Laws (in force until the Revolution, when the imperial house was deposed). The fact is that unless the Romanov imperial dynasty were enthroned, there is simply no way to change the said laws.
The descendants of Grand Duke George Mikhailovich could claim only just that: genealogical ties to the Russian emperors -- but no succession rights or claim to dynastic representation.
Message Thread | This response ↓|