Succession to the Romanian Throne, Part 1

[LadyRohan]

Obviously you do not know Romania too much if you suppose Romanian would ignore not only the Constitutions of the Kingdom but also long established traditions.
If you were also realistic you would notice no grandchild of the King lives in the country and so the King's descendants are not really linked with the country except the two daughters of the King that are childless.

I have never commented on your bonds with Romania and your knowledge of the land and its people. I would thank you to extend the same courtesy to me.

You keep using the argument that the Crown Princess and her sister, Princess Maria, are childless. Would you support their succession if they weren't?

Nicholas is closely linked with the country, and despite your best efforts to always call it a 'closed chapter', I guess reading the news, blogs etc, might help you realize that to many Romanians, it is not, and to many monarchists, he represents the future of the monarchy after his aunt, the CP.

If a single mother can become Queen of Norway, I'm sure a single Prince who has a child out of wedlock can become King in a restored kingdom of Romania. Nicholas has far closer ties to Romania than any Hohenzollern, he represents his grandfathers heritage and for whatever reason last years events took place, I believe he is the future still, and that he will be restored and return to Romania at some point.

I have yet to meet a Romanian who doesn't think a restored monarchy will be based on someone from the RF. They might not all think it will happen, and not all of them like the King, or the CP, or Prince Radu, but that is where they see it as realistic.

I remember asking one of my best friends not long ago if he would support restoring the monarchy under a Prince of Hohenzollern being asked to assume the throne. I'll never forget his face as he shouted: Hohen-who?!

I guess the world has moved on.

 

[Cory]

There are Romanian royalists that support the constitutional Line of Succession even if many Romanians do not kno the nowadays Hohenzollerns. The majority of Romanians have no clue who Ms Medforth Mills or Ms Biarneix are too.
The two Princesses that live in Romania are childless and this is a fact. The others descendants of the King do not live in the country and are not really envolved in the Romanian society. This is a fact too. Mr Medforth Mills has his supporters but his supporters are not neccesarily the supporters of his eldest aunt. Another fact.
All those that respect the royalist Romanian traditions know what the Constitution of 1923 said about Succession.

 

[Cory]

The article 78 who spoke about the succession of the Hohenzollerns did not mention that.

 

[LadyRohan]

This constitution of 1923 did (i don't have read it)says something about the religion that should be the future king?

It says that the King has to be orthodox, but for some reason, some people here say that this should be ignored as being irrelevant in 2016, while those of us who advocate updating a line of succession to correspond with 2016, are ignorant of history.

Figure it out those who can

 

[Cory]

Article 77 speaks about the Orthodox religion of the descendants of the King. The First two Kings of Romania were Catholic. Nobody had asked Prince Ferdinand to convert to Orthodoxy in order to become Crown Prince of Romania when King Carol I did not have sons. Now we are in the same situation like with the Succession of Carol I but now there is no more a National official Church in Romania but 18 equal religious denominations.
Article 78 speaks about what happens if the King has no descedants in direct male Line and indicates the descendants of the brothers of King Carol I without any other requirements.

 

[Cory]

We are in the same situation like in 1889 when King Carol I did not have children and Prince Ferdinand of Hohenzollern became Crown Prince. The Constitution of 1866 had had the same rules like that of 1923 but Crown Prince Ferdinand was not asked to convert.
It is not required any Prince of Hohenzollern to become Orthodox in order to inherit the Throne. The future Constitution will anyhow respect the freedom of conscience taking into account there is no official National Church in Romania like in 1866.

King Michael modified his proposed List different times in the last years.

The constitutional Line is very clear but I was just saying there are no polls regarding the future of the Royal Family after the King.
The Constitution of 1923 is the Constitution anolished illegally by the Communists in 1947 and it is certainly dear to all those that respect the democratical royal past of Romania.

 

[Benjamin]

It says that should be Orthodox? But then should not ignore the constitution. But I imagine that if the Hohenzollerns accept the throne that can simply be changed and their religion.

Indeed, the article in question does require that the Sovereign be of the Orthodox faith. This is why all of King Michael's children were raised Orthodox--for the additional reason that had a son been produced, and made the succession less complicated, it would have been necessary for him to be of the faith prescribed by the Constitution.

I agree with you eya that the Hohenzollerns would be required to convert if they desired to press a claim in Romania.

 

[Cris M]

Oh, how nice that you think a new Constitution must respect freedom of conscience, while it can completely ignore five women simply because they are women.

 

[Benjamin]

Oh, how nice that you think a new Constitution must respect freedom of conscience, while it can completely ignore five women simply because they are women.

Hear, hear! ??

 

[Cory]

Indeed, the article in question does require that the Sovereign be of the Orthodox faith. This is why all of King Michael's children were raised Orthodox--for the additional reason that had a son been produced, and made the succession less complicated, it would have been necessary for him to be of the faith prescribed by the Constitution.

I agree with you eya that the Hohenzollerns would be required to convert if they desired to press a claim in Romania.

We are in the same situation like of the Succession of Prince Ferdinand of Hohenzollern to King Carol I. Nobody asked him to convert and he remained a devout Catholic all his life and probably the most important of the Romanian Kings. Nobody is asking the Princes of Hohenzollern to convert now in order to succeed to the Romanian dynastic rights.

 

[NotHRH]

That's because you seem steadfastly determined not to look beyond the narrow and dismissive way you have misunderstood constitutional monarchy as a form of national government. You make sweeping generalisations about whinging and begging royals, without actually providing any evidence to support such accusations. King Michael, who first became king 89 years ago, is a living symbol of Romania's history. He has not begged for anything, and there is absolutely nothing pretentious or arrogant about this fine old gentleman who served the people of Romania as king. The only arrogance here has been the way you have totally refused to even consider that the Royal House of Romania has found a niche for itself within the Republic of Romania. As such, even as an historical institution, King Michael's successor as Head of the Royal House of Romania is a topic of interest to many people who join in this discussion.

No I have read about various situations involving royals and have my own thoughts and opinions about the subject. Banishing Nicholas because he fathered an out of wedlock child is arrogant and equates to begging his hopeful future subjects not to think his family is immoral. Pompous arrogance on his part and it is begging for his people not to think badly of his family so they can restored to the throne. When a person views a situation differently than you, maybe they have also given much thought to it and came to a different conclusion. I think my thoughts about Michael and his family sting some people because (maybe just maybe) it hits a raw nerve (=made you think about the situation from a different point of view and actually does make sense). I never try to change anybody's thoughts on any subject, when I post something I am only stating my thoughts and opinions. People are not narrow-minded just because they have a different opinion.

 

[MAfan]

There is no poll regarding who the people consider as future Heir to the Throne.

What purpose would it serve? Doesn't your dear 1923 Constitution clearly says who the future Heir to the Throne should be?

 

[LadyRohan]

Oh, how nice that you think a new Constitution must respect freedom of conscience, while it can completely ignore five women simply because they are women.

Hear, hear indeed!

 

[LadyRohan]

No I have read about various situations involving royals and have my own thoughts and opinions about the subject. Banishing Nicholas because he fathered an out of wedlock child is arrogant and equates to begging his hopeful future subjects not to think his family is immoral. Pompous arrogance on his part and it is begging for his people not to think badly of his family so they can restored to the throne. When a person views a situation differently than you, maybe they have also given much thought to it and came to a different conclusion. I think my thoughts about Michael and his family sting some people because (maybe just maybe) it hits a raw nerve (=made you think about the situation from a different point of view and actually does make sense). I never try to change anybody's thoughts on any subject, when I post something I am only stating my thoughts and opinions. People are not narrow-minded just because they have a different opinion.

I'll just answer this quickly to make clear that your views touch no nerve on my part, that would make me re-think a position or change my mind on monarchies and royalty. They are however, very uninformed, generalized and tabloid, and show very little insight into what royalty is, what it symbolizes and how it functions in modern monarchies.

There are many facts behind monarchies, and royalty (some of which can be found in the monarchy vs. republic thread, and to trivialize and denegrate the effort most of them do for their countries, and people who want them to do the job they do, is not nerve-touching. It's just uninformed.

About Nicholas and King Michael, you may use the word arrogance again as much as you want. I am deeply disappointed at the decision that was taken, but we actually do not know the basis for it. We can speculate and hypothesize, but I recommend saving the strongest words for when there are facts on the table, and not just hyperbole.

 

[MAfan]

As reminded by a fellow Moderator only a few hour ago, this is NOT the republic vs. monarchy thread nor the place for such a discussion.
So please move on and return on topic.
Thanks.

 

[Countessmeout]

The constitution of 1923 doesn't exist any more. The last constitution of Romania is from 1991, as a republic. If a monarchy was to be reinstituted, a new constitution would have to be written as the 1923 no longer exists, it was replaced. I don't see why the new constitution would not allow for at the very least male preference, even if they don't want full equality.

I see these arguments that the Princesses who have kids don't live in Romania. Well either do the Hohenzollerns, they live in Germany. Do they speak Romanian? Are they involved in Romania in any way?

It just seems odd to me. Yes they are related to Carol I. But why would they go so far back, when there are descendents of the actual line? IMO it would be like if the Greeks restored their monarchy but instead of Constantine and his children they named Fred or Joachim as heir. The first king of Modern Greece was a Danish prince, Marge's sons are descended from his older brother just as the Hohenollerns are descended from Carol I's older brother.

 

[Cris M]

If Romania ever decide to restore the Monarchy during the King's lifetime, I'm sure he'll get his throne back, but certainly with the Crown Princess as Regent. I also believe Parliament will appoint Nicholas as the Crown Princess' heir, even if the King and the Crown Princess don't like the idea.

And I think the Crown Princess will put her nephew back in the line of succession, once she becames the Head of the Royal House. I may be wrong, but she seems to be more interested in a restoration than her father, and she surely knows her nephew is their only hope.

 

[Cory]

You are right when you say Mr Medfoth Mills was their only hope for popular support but they certainly chaged everything in august 2015.

 

[Cory]

The constitution of 1923 doesn't exist any more. The last constitution of Romania is from 1991, as a republic. If a monarchy was to be reinstituted, a new constitution would have to be written as the 1923 no longer exists, it was replaced. I don't see why the new constitution would not allow for at the very least male preference, even if they don't want full equality.

I see these arguments that the Princesses who have kids don't live in Romania. Well either do the Hohenzollerns, they live in Germany. Do they speak Romanian? Are they involved in Romania in any way?

It just seems odd to me. Yes they are related to Carol I. But why would they go so far back, when there are descendents of the actual line? IMO it would be like if the Greeks restored their monarchy but instead of Constantine and his children they named Fred or Joachim as heir. The first king of Modern Greece was a Danish prince, Marge's sons are descended from his older brother just as the Hohenollerns are descended from Carol I's older brother.

The Succession respects the Constitution that was in place when Monarchy was abolished as in many other cases in Europe. If Monarchy will be restored the Hohenzollerns would be asked to reign. If they refuse it could be another Royal Family.
It is true the Hohenzollerns do not live in Romania but they have the dynastic rights.
The descendance of the King have only two grandaughters " in Line" that have nothing to do with Romania so nobody would choose them.

 

[Cris M]

Instead of choosing one the last King's descendants, Romania would prefer a German Prince "that has nothing to do with Romania" as the new King.

Strong logic.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Instead of choosing one the last King's descendants, Romania would prefer a German Prince "that has nothing to do with Romania" as the new King.

Strong logic.

Have miss Karina Medforth-Mills from Newcastle-upon-Tyne and mademoiselle Elisabeth Biarneix from Paris anything to do with Romania?

On itself it does not matter where someone comes from, we know stories of South-Africans or US citizens becoming a Peer because they happened to be the most close Heir male of the body of the last Peer.

 

[Cris M]

Have miss Karina Medforth-Mills from Newcastle-upon-Tyne and mademoiselle Elisabeth Biarneix from Paris anything to do with Romania?

Nothing besides being the daughters of Princesses of Romania, and descendants of the three previous Romanian Monarchs.

The Prince of Hohenzollern is the first in line of succession according to the Monarchical Constitutional, but he already he wants nothing to do with Romania.

Unless Nicholas Medforth-Mills becomes a Prince of Romania again, eith by his grandfather or aunt's will, or because the Romanian Parliament wants him to be a Prince, I see no chance of a monarchical restoration in Romania.

 

[Cory]

Maybe Mr Biarneix has more to do with Romania than his daughter.

Instead of choosing one the last King's descendants, Romania would prefer a German Prince "that has nothing to do with Romania" as the new King.

Strong logic.

The German Princes are first of all Princes, second are descendants of the brothers of King Carol I, third have dynastic rights and at kast but not at last are proud of their ancestors.
Are Ms Medforth Mills and Ms Biarneix more connected with Romania? The King 's grandaughters do not even speak Romanian.

Just like the Hohenzollern Princes don't speak it...

At least the German Princes are not the grandchildren of a Romanian King.

At one side you have the "candidates" to the headship of the House according to the pre-2007 changes: Karl-Friedrich and Alexander von Hohenzollern, both with a business education and running a big estate with more than 4.000 (!) staff working for them, managing various castles and estates which have been and still are preserved since more than 900 years.

At the other side there is a lady walking around from Newcastle-upon-Tyne, no idea what background she has, how she is educated, what her career is, she is completely invisible, exactly like her cousine from Paris. And these are the better candidates, for managing and preserving the patrimonium of the Romanian branch of the Hohenzollerns? This British or French lady will maintain the large, historic estate of Peles with the castle and the lodge and the surrounding domains? They are able to maintain and manage the house and the domain in Săvârșin? I think few can fight that Prince Karl-Friedrich, Germany's 3rd biggest private landowner, has proven how to manage an immense historic patrimonium and large estates. His son Prince Alexander has studied Economics in Lausanne (Switzerland) and has already enrolled in the board of the Unternehmensgruppe Hohenzollern. The whole estate is managed by professionals.

Forget about a restoration of the monarchy. Think about the patrimonium of the Kings of Romania. Who can preserve it better than the Hohenzollern cousins? They can add the Romanian lands and estates to their collection and manage it with the well-known German efficiency. When it all goes to the lady in the UK or the other one in Paris, I think the first thing you will see is "For Sale" in front of Săvârșin, so that the girls can lead a good life in London or Paris with the profits.

All the properties of the King will be inherired by his descendants.
The Hohenzollern inherit only the dnastic rights but not the properties of the King.

He was a fraud. Alain Biarneix claimed to be the illegitimate child of an Archduke. The lawyers of Archduke Otto, the last Heir of Austria and Hungary and Head of the House of Habsburg, summoned him to stop spreading these false claims. When Alain Biarneix continued to call himself a Habsburg, the lawyers of Archduke Otto came in action. He was finally sued for false impersonation and was forced to give up the claim as there was no any relation to the Habsburgers.

Afther this he started to go into society under the pseudonym "Alain de Laufenborg". He came in contact with Princess Sofia of Romania, managed to get her into his spell and married her, very much against King Michael's wishes. The King stripped his daughter from her title Princess of Romania and her style HRH (What is new?) because he thought this fraud, faker and impersonator was an "undesirable" annex to the House of Romania, also seeing the legal intervention by the House of Habsburg against her daughter's partner.

Alain and Sofia got a daughter: Elisabeth Biarneix. Afther the divorce from Alain, King Michael changed his mind once again (what is new?) and restored his daughter's title Princess of Romania and her style HRH. The daughter of this fraud, faker and impersonator was never a member of the Royal House nor was ever in the line of succession, until King Michael changed his mind once more (What is new?) and created a whole new line of succession, including the daughter of the man he disapproved so much that he stripped his own daughter from her royal position...

Is Mr Biarneix living in Romania or just visiting ofen the country?

When it are all private properties yes. When it is set into a House Foundation, it depends on the statutes. But indeed, when it all goes to the descendants in the UK, the USA and France, it is logical that the Fürst von Hohenzollern shrugs his shoulders and continue managing his own formidable assets than following cousin Michael's adventures. But a Prince Karl-Friedrich or a Prince Alexander, with their thousands of staff behind them, are a formidable party for a monarchist movement. I can not see how the British girl, Karina, can ever fly the flag for the House of Romania.

The Hohenzollerns can inherit only dynastic rights in Romania and nothing more.

The descendants of King Michael are not dynasts according to the Constitutions of the Kingdom of Romania so al the decisions regarding dynastic rights to them are mot really relevant.

There is no connection know between the Hohenzollrn Princes and the non-dynastic descendants of King Mihai.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Maybe Mr Biarneix has more to do with Romania than his daughter.

He was a fraud. Alain Biarneix claimed to be the illegitimate child of an Archduke. The lawyers of Archduke Otto, the last Heir of Austria and Hungary and Head of the House of Habsburg, summoned him to stop spreading these false claims. When Alain Biarneix continued to call himself a Habsburg, the lawyers of Archduke Otto came in action. He was finally sued for false impersonation and was forced to give up the claim as there was no any relation to the Habsburgers.

Afther this he started to go into society under the pseudonym "Alain de Laufenborg". He came in contact with Princess Sofia of Romania, managed to get her into his spell and married her, very much against King Michael's wishes. The King stripped his daughter from her title Princess of Romania and her style HRH (What is new?) because he thought this fraud, faker and impersonator was an "undesirable" annex to the House of Romania, also seeing the legal intervention by the House of Habsburg against his daughter's partner.

Alain and Sofia got a daughter: Elisabeth Biarneix. Afther the divorce from Alain, King Michael changed his mind once again (what is new?) and restored his daughter's title Princess of Romania and her style HRH. The daughter of this fraud, faker and impersonator was never a member of the Royal House nor was ever in the line of succession, until King Michael changed his mind once more (What is new?) and created a whole new line of succession, including the daughter of the man he disapproved so much that he stripped his own daughter from her royal position...

 

[MAfan]

The King 's grandaughters do not even speak Romanian.

Just like the Hohenzollern Princes don't speak it...

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

At one side you have the "candidates" to the headship of the House according to the pre-2007 changes: Karl-Friedrich and Alexander von Hohenzollern, both with a business education and running a big estate with more than 4.000 (!) staff working for them, managing various castles and estates which have been and still are preserved since more than 900 years.

At the other side there is a lady walking around from Newcastle-upon-Tyne, no idea what background she has, how she is educated, what her career is, she is completely invisible, exactly like her cousine from Paris. And these are the better candidates, for managing and preserving the patrimonium of the Romanian branch of the Hohenzollerns? This British or French lady will maintain the large, historic estate of Peles with the castle and the lodge and the surrounding domains? They are able to maintain and manage the house and the domain in Săvârșin? I think few can fight that Prince Karl-Friedrich, Germany's 3rd biggest private landowner, has proven how to manage an immense historic patrimonium and large estates. His son Prince Alexander has studied Economics in Lausanne (Switzerland) and has already enrolled in the board of the Unternehmensgruppe Hohenzollern. The whole estate is managed by professionals.

Forget about a restoration of the monarchy. Think about the patrimonium of the Kings of Romania. Who can preserve it better than the Hohenzollern cousins? They can add the Romanian lands and estates to their collection and manage it with the well-known German efficiency. When it all goes to the lady in the UK or the other one in Paris, I think the first thing you will see is "For Sale" in front of Săvârșin, so that the girls can lead a good life in London or Paris with the profits.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

All the properties of the King will be inherired by his descendants.
The Hohenzollern inherit only the dnastic rights but not the properties of the King.

When it are all private properties yes. When it is set into a House Foundation, it depends on the statutes. But indeed, when it all goes to the descendants in the UK, the USA and France, it is logical that the Fürst von Hohenzollern shrugs his shoulders and continue managing his own formidable assets than following cousin Michael's adventures. But a Prince Karl-Friedrich or a Prince Alexander, with their thousands of staff behind them, are a formidable party for a monarchist movement. I can not see how the British girl, Karina, can ever fly the flag for the House of Romania.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

The Hohenzollerns can inherit only dynastic rights in Romania and nothing more.

That is a claim you can not substantiate as long as we do not know of the royal estate is specifically owned by Michael as a private person or by a legal entity which is not subjected to inheritance (and taxation!) laws.

 

[maria-olivia]

It is sad that the Princesses of Romania with their excellent pedigree married bad commonors and of course divorced .

 

[MAfan]

That is a claim you can not substantiate as long as we do not know of the royal estate is specifically owned by Michael as a private person or by a legal entity which is not subjected to inheritance (and taxation!) laws.

That's true, but, since the properties were returned to King Michael personally, in the case he put them into a trust or foundation or whatever else legal entity, wouldn't it be unlikely that he settled the thing allowing the properties to be passed to his Hohenzollern cousins rather than to his own descendants?