|
The title of Archduke and non-members of the House of Austria
Wed, 26 Jul 2006 19:58:06 GMT
alt.talk.royalty
previous
Charles von Hamm...
|
Aside from various Kings of Spain, has anyone other than a member of the
House of Austria ever borne the title of Archduke? Apparently, there is a
Charles von Hamm...
|
I'm looking for a non-Wikipedia answer.
nycram...
|
Then try the 1th edition of the Brittanica:
|
Stan Brown...
|
Aren't we all. :-)
There's a fun article in this week's /Onion/: "Wikipedia Celebrates
750 Years Of American Independence".
|
Charles von Hamm
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
kjmcva...
|
maybe you shd clarify this from the start as this is more efficient and
saves other people the trouble
kjmcva...
|
maybe not for you
may one suggest that you asked te questions more precisely
and btw: the tone of the reply is quite objectionable too
furthermore the wikipedia article answered your question: yes it was
done
Charles von Hamm...
|
Wikipedia is rife with content disputes and incorrect content at any given
time. I have seen the Wikipedia article on Prince Albert of Saxony, Duke of
Teschen before. It did not answer my question because I wouldn't have asked
if it had.
Charles von Hamm
kjmcva...
|
did ypu mention in your quesion that you have seen the wokipedia
article? no you did not
so....
|
|
|
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
Charles von Hamm...
|
It isn't much trouble at all to look up a Wikipedia article. It wasn't the
CJ Buyers...
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
pierre_aronax...
CJ Buyers...
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
pierre_aronax...
CJ Buyers...
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
pierre_aronax...
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
question though. What was asked was if it was possible (or ever done) to
make an individual an archduke who was not a member of the House of Austria.
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
CJ Buyers...
|
One assumes that was exactly what was done with members of the House of
Lorraine.
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
CJ Buyers...
Charles von Hamm...
|
That is at least different in that the "old" House of Austria had become
totally extinct of males.
CJ Buyers...
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
pierre_aronax...
CJ Buyers...
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
pierre_aronax...
CJ Buyers...
|
Nevertheless, that was a precedent for a declaration that those who
CJ Buyers...
were not, could be made so. I doubt if the declaration was so specific
as to forbid such a creation under different circumstances.
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
|
Was anybody who was not already an Archdule made an Archduke in the
House of Lorraine?
CJ Buyers...
|
How else did the Lorraine's become Archdukes, under Salic Law?
CJ Buyers...
CJ Buyers...
pierre_aronax...
|
Under semi-Salic Law, Maria-Theresa's children were born Archdukes,
edespalais...
|
an (Anglo-?) American term
Maria-Theresa's children were born Archdukes,
|
edespalais...
|
See the publications by Charles d'Eszlary, in French
|
weren't they? Did anybody of them actually *become* an Archduke not
having been one since his birth?
CJ Buyers...
|
Perhaps you can quote a text which made them so?
pierre_aronax...
|
I made no claim at all, only asked a question. You claimed members of
the House of Lorraine were *made* Archdukes (which is quite different
CJ Buyers...
from being born an Archduke) and that it settled a precedent that those
who were not could be made so. I found the possibility interesting and
asked for an actual exemple. I sincerely don't know if that was the
case or not.
CJ Buyers...
|
Isn't it perfectly obvious?
Surely in cases where a family follows Salic or semi-Salic law, indeed
in virtually any Royal system, some creation is necessary when
succession passes to a female line. Whether that happens after the
children are born or a declaration to the same effect is made before
they are born, isn't material to the issue.=20
edespalais...
|
That one fully understands!
|
pierre_aronax...
|
It is fundamentally materal to the issue (which is: "was it possible
(or ever done) to make an individual an archduke who was not a member
of the House of Austria").
The House of Austria becomes extent in male line: by semi-salic law,
the closest female relative of the last male and his posterity
CJ Buyers...
*becomes* then the House of Austria. Quite obviously, if that posterity
is still not born, nobody will be *made* an Archduke: the rule will
CJ Buyers...
|
Actually, the opposite is the case. Creations are frequently made
before birth, simply to ensure that they enjoy certain titles when they
are born. It is no less a creation. Being born, in such cases, is
merely the time at which the grant takes effect.
CJ Buyers...
CJ Buyers...
|
stay that only members of the House of Austria are Archdukes and nobody
else. That is different entirely from somebody "who was not a member of
the House of Austria" being made ad hoc an Archduke.
Charles von Hamm...
|
This is where Prince Albert of Saxony, Duke of Teschen fits into the
picture.
edespalais...
|
Albert, in German: Albrecht, this "story" fits into your picture!
By the way: Mr. Fran=E7ois Velde has some experiences with the
succession in Austrian lands, see his site.
|
Charles von Hamm
|
CJ Buyers...
|
Well then please be kind enough to quote the semi-salic "law" which
says this. Where is it published as you describe and where does it say
that this applies to the "House of Austria"? Which law says that the
title Archduke of Austria only applies to members of the House of
Austria are Archdukes and nobody else. Do you have a reference for such
a law?
For goodness sake, wars were fought over all this. So clearly the issue
isn't as clear cut as you try to make out. What you are relating is
simply the argument put forward by one of the parties involved the
dispute.=20
pierre_aronax...
|
Which is precisely the party about which was asked if it has conferred
the title of Archduke to someone else than a member of what that party
saw as the House of Austria.
CJ Buyers...
|
Well, clearly they too believed that one could be an Archduke by
creation, since the Teschen would be their creation after all.
As far as I can make out, even they were not entirely sure who
constituted the House of Austria at the time, since they depend partly
on the renunciation of Maria Josefa. So clearly, those other than "the
closest female relative of the last male" had rights too.
To complicate matters further, Maria Josefa's renunciation, for
whatever it is worth, actually refers to the Emperor Francis I and his
children. Not a word about "the closest female relative of the last
male" except in passing as his wife.
Christopher Buyers
|
|
Christopher Buyers
|
|
Christopher Buyers
|
|
Christopher Buyers
|
|
|
|
It is interesting to note that Francis Stephen of Lorraine became Duke
of Teschen in 1724.
Christopher Buyers
|
Charles von Hamm
|
Christopher Buyers
|
Charles von Hamm
|
|
|
statue at the Albertina in Vienna of Prince Albert of Saxony, Duke of
Teschen that has a plaque according him the title of Archduke. Either this
is an error on the plaque-maker's part, a mistake of identity of the man
depicted by the statue, someone's fuzzy memory or Albert really was created
an archduke.
Has it ever been possible?
Charles von Hamm
kjmcva...
|
states that he was indeed given the title of Archduke
|
|
|
