Page 2 of 4 [ 54 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

ASS-P
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Feb 2007
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,980
Location: Santa Cruz , CA , USA

23 Jan 2019, 7:08 pm

...They wouldn't have a Willi or a Samue? :P :lol: :wink:


_________________
Renal kidney failure, congestive heart failure, COPD. Can't really get up from a floor position unhelped anymore:-(.
One of the walking wounded ~ SMASHED DOWN by life and age, now prevented from even expressing myself! SOB.
" Oh, no! First you have to PROVE you deserve to go away to college! " ~ My mother, 1978 (the heyday of Andy Gibb and Player). I would still like to go.:-(
My life destroyed by Thorazine and Mellaril - and rape - and the Psychiatric/Industrial Complex. SOB:-(! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !!


kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

23 Jan 2019, 7:41 pm

Imagine if Prince Harry become King as Henry IX?



QuantumChemist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Oct 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,111
Location: Midwest

23 Jan 2019, 8:53 pm

BaronHarkonnen85 wrote:
Fnord wrote:
BaronHarkonnen85 wrote:
Wolfram87 wrote:
Did he have a son? I just got a mental image of a french equivalent of Shakespeare writing a play based on the life of Henri VIII.
Jean IV, Duke of Vendome is now King of France.
He is only a CLAIMANT to the non-existent kingship of a non-existent kingdom.

He is not king of the French Republic.


Firstly, the republic is illegitimate.

Secondly, the fundamental laws use Continuity of the Crown, so as soon as the king dies, the heir is king. This also means the throne is never vacant. This is regardless of the de facto government.


Unfortunately the blade of the guillotine said otherwise. Some of my distant relatives on my Mother’s side were put to the blade the same way. They were done in by other family members as a power play.



EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

23 Jan 2019, 9:50 pm

The King is dead, long live the King.



BaronHarkonnen85
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 26 May 2016
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 297
Location: Tennessee

23 Jan 2019, 10:42 pm

QuantumChemist wrote:
BaronHarkonnen85 wrote:
Fnord wrote:
BaronHarkonnen85 wrote:
Wolfram87 wrote:
Did he have a son? I just got a mental image of a french equivalent of Shakespeare writing a play based on the life of Henri VIII.
Jean IV, Duke of Vendome is now King of France.
He is only a CLAIMANT to the non-existent kingship of a non-existent kingdom.

He is not king of the French Republic.


Firstly, the republic is illegitimate.

Secondly, the fundamental laws use Continuity of the Crown, so as soon as the king dies, the heir is king. This also means the throne is never vacant. This is regardless of the de facto government.


Unfortunately the blade of the guillotine said otherwise. Some of my distant relatives on my Mother’s side were put to the blade the same way. They were done in by other family members as a power play.


The monarchy was actually restored for a while. The last legitimate king was Charles X. He was illegally deposed in the July Revolution, resulting in the illegitimate July Monarchy of Louis-Philippe as "King of the French."

Louis-Philippe is the ancestor of the current king, Jean IV.

The last of the senior Bourbons in France died in 1883. Louis-Philippe's grandson became the titular King of France as Philip VII.

While there is a senior branch in Spain, they are foreign, making them "incapable of all succession" in the words of Charles IX. Further, the Spanish Bourbons renounced the throne in the Treaty of Utrecht.

Regardless, there is a small number of royalists who support the claim of Don Luis de Borbon, who calls himself the "Duke of Anjou," even though he has no right to such a title.


_________________
--Baron Vladimir Harkonnen
The "Enlightenment" was the work of Satan


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

24 Jan 2019, 2:36 am

kraftiekortie wrote:
Imagine if Prince Harry become King as Henry IX?


Before he was born many wanted William to be named Arthur so that he'd eventually be King Arthur. Although I believe they compromised and his second of 4 names is Arthur. So he could still be crowned as Arthur, if he choses that name. I don't think that would result in King Arthur II though. But maybe.



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

24 Jan 2019, 8:43 am

King Arthur was not an actual King of England. I believe most people believe Arthur was a semi-legendary British king who lived about 400-500 AD (The British were totally separate from the English, it should be noted. They spoke a Celtic language).

So, should William choose Arthur, he would be Arthur I.



EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

24 Jan 2019, 9:12 am

kraftiekortie wrote:
King Arthur was not an actual King of England. I believe most people believe Arthur was a semi-legendary British king who lived about 400-500 AD (The British were totally separate from the English, it should be noted. They spoke a Celtic language).

So, should William choose Arthur, he would be Arthur I.


Actually he wouldn't become Arthur I (the first) until there was a second king nammed Arthur. That's why Queen Victoria isn't Victoria I.

As I recall the first official King of England was Egbert sometime during 800, and then William the Conqueror started the line of Norman kings sometime during1000.

I can't remember what the deal with naming William Arthur was. Something along the lines of a legend or prophecy I think.



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

24 Jan 2019, 9:21 am

The first king of a "united" Anglo-Saxon England was considered by most historians to be Alfred the Great.

You're right, of course. He would only be Arthur, not Arthur I.

William I, also known as William the Conqueror, who was Duke of Normandy, took the English throne away from Anglo-Saxon King Harold through invasion and conquest in 1066.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,953
Location:      

24 Jan 2019, 9:34 am

The king is dead, long live the Republic!

There is no kingdom of France. There is no king of France or "King of the French". There is no "Divine Right of Kings". There are, however, at least five alleged "chateaux royale", each claiming to be THE legitimate line to the abolished and non-existent monarchy. None of their claims would stand up in court, not even the World Court.


Image

Liberté, égalité, fraternité!



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

24 Jan 2019, 9:39 am

The end of the French monarchy came when Emperor Napoleon III was overthrown in 1870.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,953
Location:      

24 Jan 2019, 10:02 am

Monarchies are throwbacks to, and holdovers from, the Age of Slavery.



Trueno
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Jul 2017
Age: 70
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,788
Location: UK

24 Jan 2019, 11:07 am

France is a republic... end of!

There was no Henry VII, just some old dude who had a putative claim to the throne... if the throne still existed. Sorry for his family and all that.

France did well to dump their monarchy so long ago. The UK is still stuck with the Saxe-Coburgs.


_________________
Steve J

Unkind tongue, right ill hast thou me rendered
For such desert to do me wreak and shame


BaronHarkonnen85
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 26 May 2016
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 297
Location: Tennessee

24 Jan 2019, 11:51 am

EzraS wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
King Arthur was not an actual King of England. I believe most people believe Arthur was a semi-legendary British king who lived about 400-500 AD (The British were totally separate from the English, it should be noted. They spoke a Celtic language).

So, should William choose Arthur, he would be Arthur I.


Actually he wouldn't become Arthur I (the first) until there was a second king nammed Arthur. That's why Queen Victoria isn't Victoria I.

As I recall the first official King of England was Egbert sometime during 800, and then William the Conqueror started the line of Norman kings sometime during1000.

I can't remember what the deal with naming William Arthur was. Something along the lines of a legend or prophecy I think.


The numbering of kings, at least in England, wasn't until William the Conqueror. Generally, the first English monarch was Alfred the Great, who united the Anglo-Saxons, though the north of England was ruled by the Danelaw.

The House of Wessex and the Danes went back-and-forth for a while over control of England.


_________________
--Baron Vladimir Harkonnen
The "Enlightenment" was the work of Satan


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

24 Jan 2019, 12:38 pm

Checking Britannica, Egbert is listed as the first king of Wessex and Athelstan as the first king of England. Athelstan was king of Wessex and the first king of all England (925–939).

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Kings- ... in-1856932



Zinnia86
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Jan 2019
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 624

24 Jan 2019, 1:09 pm

TW1ZTY wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
I'm in same boat. Doesn't look like they'll ever restore me to my rightful place upon the thrown of Russia! :(



Thanks for the throwback TW1ZTY! I had every song in that movie memorized when I was a kid. Glad to know I still remember most of the words :D