August 6, 1806: The Holy Roman Empire is Dissolved

Tags

Abdication, Austrian Empire, Austrian-Hungarian Empire, Battle of Austerlitz, Confederation of the Rhine, Franz II-I, German Empire, Holy Roman Emperor and Emperor of Austria, Holy Roman Empire, Napoleon

The dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire occurred de facto on August 6, 1806, when the last Holy Roman Emperor, Franz II of the House of Habsburg-Lorraine, abdicated his title and released all imperial states and princes from their oaths and obligations to the empire.

Franz II-I, Holy Roman Emperor and Emperor of Austria

The empire was dissolved following a military defeat by the French under Napoleon at Austerlitz. Napoleon reorganized much of the Empire into the Confederation of the Rhine, a French satellite.

Emperor Franz survived the demise of the Holy Roman Empire by continuing to reign as the Emperor of Austria.

Holy Roman Empire in 1806

In 1804 Emperor Franz united his hereditary lands as Archduke of Austria and Kings of Hungary, Bohemia and Croatia into The Austrian Empire. Prior to the creation of this empire the Habsburg Holy Roman Emperors ruled these lands in person union and not as a centralized state.

The Austrian Empire would last until the Habsburg empire’s final dissolution in 1918 in the aftermath of World War I.

German Empire & Austrian-Hungarian Empire

The Napoleonic Confederation of the Rhine was replaced by a new union, the German Confederation in 1815, following the end of the Napoleonic Wars. It lasted until 1866 when Prussia founded the North German Confederation, a forerunner of the German Empire which united the German-speaking territories outside of Austria and Switzerland under Prussian leadership in 1871. This state developed into modern Germany.

From the Emperor’s Desk: Starting Monday I will begin a series on an in-depth examination of the ending of the Holy Roman Empire.

July 21, 1831: Accession Ceremony of Leopold of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha as King of the Belgians

Tags

Auguste of Leuchtenberg, Belgium, Duke of Nemours, Eugène de Beauharnais, George IV of the United Kingdom, King Leopold I of the Belgians, King Louis Philippe of the French, Leopold of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, Napoleon, National Congress, Prince Louis, The Prince Regent

Leopold I (December 16, 1790 – December 10, 1865) was the first King of the Belgians, reigning from July 21, 1831 until his death in 1865.

Leopold was born in Coburg in The Holy Roman Empire and the tiny German duchy of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld in modern-day Bavaria. He was the youngest son of Franz, Duke of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld, and Countess Augusta of Reuss-Ebersdorf.

In 1826, Saxe-Coburg acquired the city of Gotha from the neighboring Duchy of Saxe-Gotha-Altenburg and gave up Saalfeld to Saxe-Meiningen, becoming the Duchy of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha.

Leopold took a commission in the Imperial Russian Army and fought against Napoleon after French troops overran Saxe-Coburg during the Napoleonic Wars. After Napoleon’s defeat, Leopold moved to the United Kingdom where he married Princess Charlotte of Wales, who was second in line to the British throne and the only legitimate child of the Prince Regent (the future King George IV).

On November 5, 1817, after having suffered a miscarriage, Princess Charlotte gave birth to a stillborn son. She herself died the next day following complications. Leopold was said to have been heartbroken by her death.

Had Charlotte survived, she would have become Queen of the United Kingdom on the death of her father and Leopold presumably would have assumed the role of prince consort, later taken by his nephew Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha.

Despite Charlotte’s death, Leopold continued to enjoy considerable status in Britain and the Prince Regent granted Prince Leopold the British style of Royal Highness by Order in Council on April 6, 1818.

From 1828 to 1829, Leopold had an affair with the actress Caroline Bauer, who bore a striking resemblance to Charlotte.

Caroline was a cousin of his advisor Baron Christian Friedrich von Stockmar. She came to England with her mother and took up residence at Longwood House, a few miles from Claremont House. But, by mid-1829, the liaison was over, and the actress and her mother returned to Berlin.

Many years later, in memoirs published after her death, she declared that she and Leopold had engaged in a morganatic marriage and that he had bestowed upon her the title of Countess Montgomery. He would have broken this marriage when the possibility arose that he could become King of Greece. The son of Baron Stockmar denied that these events ever happened, and indeed no records have been found of a civil or religious marriage with the actress.

Following a Greek rebellion against the Ottoman Empire, Leopold was offered the throne of an independent Greece as part of the London Protocol of February 1830. Though initially showing interest in the position, Leopold eventually turned down the offer on May 17, 1830. The role would subsequently be accepted by Otto of Wittelsbach in May 1832 who ruled until he was finally deposed in October 1862.

At the end of August 1830, rebels in the Southern provinces (modern-day Belgium) of the United Kingdom of the Netherlands rose up against Dutch rule. The rising, which began in Brussels, pushed the Dutch army back, and the rebels defended themselves against a Dutch attack. International powers meeting in London agreed to support the independence of Belgium, even though the Dutch refused to recognize the new state.

In November 1830, a National Congress was established in Belgium to create a constitution for the new state. Fears of “mob rule” associated with republicanism after the French Revolution of 1789, as well as the example of the recent, liberal July Revolution in France, led the Congress to decide that Belgium would be a popular, constitutional monarchy.

Search for a Monarch

The choice of candidates for the position was one of the most controversial issues faced by the revolutionaries. The Congress refused to consider any candidate from the Dutch ruling house of Orange-Nassau.

Some Orangists had hoped to offer the position to King Willem I of the Netherlands or his son, Willem, Prince of Orange, which would bring Belgium into personal union with the Netherlands like Luxembourg. The Great Powers also worried that a candidate from another state could risk destabilizing the international balance of power and lobbied for a neutral candidate.

Eventually the Congress was able to draw up a shortlist. The three viable possibilities were felt to be Eugène de Beauharnais, a French nobleman and stepson of Napoleon; Auguste of Leuchtenberg, son of Eugène; and Prince Louis, Duke of Nemours, who was the son of the French King Louis-Philippe.

All the candidates were French and the choice between them was principally between choosing the Bonapartism of Beauharnais or Leuchtenberg and supporting the July Monarchy of Louis-Philippe.

Louis-Philippe realized that the choice of either of the Bonapartists could be first stage of a coup against him, but that his son would also be unacceptable to other European powers suspicious of French intentions.

Prince Louis, Duke of Nemours refused the offer. With no definitive choice in sight, Catholics and Liberals united to elect Erasme Louis Surlet de Chokier, a minor Belgian nobleman, as regent to buy more time for a definitive decision in February 1831.

Leopold of Saxe-Coburg had been proposed at an early stage, but had been dropped because of French opposition. The problems caused by the French candidates and the increased international pressure for a solution led to his reconsideration. On April 22, 1831, he was finally approached by a Belgian delegation at Marlborough House to officially offer him the throne. Leopold, however, was reluctant to accept.

Accession

On July 17, 1831, Leopold travelled from Calais to Belgium, entering the country at De Panne. Travelling to Brussels, he was greeted with patriotic enthusiasm along his route.

The accession ceremony took place on July 21, on the Place Royale in Brussels. A stand had been erected on the steps of the church of Saint Jacques-sur-Coudenberg, surrounded by the names of revolutionaries fallen during the fighting in 1830.

After a ceremony of resignation by the regent, Leopold, dressed in the uniform of a Belgian lieutenant-general, swore loyalty to the constitution and became king.

The enthronement is generally used to mark the end of the revolution and the start of the Kingdom of Belgium and is celebrated each year as the Belgian national holiday.

Origins of the Holy Roman Empire. Part I.

Tags

Charlemagne, Charles the Great, Confederation of the Rhine, Emperor of the French, Holy Roman Emperor, Holy Roman Empire, Napoleon, Origins of the Holy Roman Empire, Otto the Great

From the Emperor’s Desk: I have deleted my original blog entry for the origins of the Holy Roman Empire and will expand on it as a series.

Shortly after the Battle of Austerlitz where the French Army of Emperor Napoleon defeated Austria and Russia, 16 German states joined together in a confederation on July 26, 1806, with the signing the Treaty of the Confederation of the Rhine. The founding members of the confederation were German princes of the Holy Roman Empire. They were later joined by 19 others states, altogether ruling a total of over 15 million subjects.

This Confederation granted a significant strategic advantage to the French Empire on its eastern frontier by providing a separation between France and the two largest German states, Prussia and Austria (which also controlled substantial amounts of non-German lands).

The “Protector of the Confederation” was a hereditary office held by Napoleon, the Emperor of the French. On August 1, the members of the confederation formally seceded from the Holy Roman Empire, and on August 6, following an ultimatum by Napoleon, Holy Roman Emperor Franz II declared the Holy Roman Empire dissolved and he abdicated his Imperial title and released all imperial states and officials from their oaths and obligations to the empire.

Franz II, who had proclaimed himself Emperor of Austria in 1804 by consolidating the hereditary lands of the Habsburg dynasty, continued as Emperor of Austria. The Confederation of the Rhine lasted from 1806 to 1813.

Thus ended this noble Empire. But it leads me to a question.

I have written about the ending of the Holy Roman Empire before, and instead of rehashing this topic I would like to touch upon another interesting and related topic, and it is one that is debated by historians, namely, when did the Holy Roman Empire actually begin?

Generally two events in history are where historians pinpoint the beginning of the Holy Roman Empire.

The first event occrred on December 25, 800, when Pope Leo III crowned the Frankish king Charlemagne (Charles I the Great) as Roman Emperor, reviving the Imperial title in Western Europe, more than three centuries after the fall of the ancient Western Roman Empire in 476.

The Imperial title continued in the Carolingian family until 888 and from 896 to 899, after which it was contested by the rulers of Italy in a series of civil wars until the death of the last Italian claimant, Berengar I, in 924.The Carolingian Empire is considered the first phase in the history of the Holy Roman Empire.

The second event that historians mark as the possible starting point for the Holy Roman Empire is when the Imperial title was revived yet again when Otto I, the Great, Duke of Saxony and King of East Francia was crowned Roman Emperor on February 2, 962 by Pope John XII in Rome. Otto considered himself as the successor of Charlemagne and beginning a continuous existence of the empire for over eight centuries.

Which event created the Holy Roman Empire, the coronation of Charlemagne or Otto? That is the topic of this blog series.

This date in History: August 6, 1806. Dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire.

Tags

Austrian Empire, Carlos III of Spain, Congress of Vienna, Emperorvof the French, Holy Roman Emperor, Holy Roman Emperor Francis II, Holy Roman Empire, Joseph II, Leopold II, Louis XIV, Marie Antoinette, Napoleon, Napoleon Bonaparte

Although I’m in the middle of a series of posts examining the origins of the Holy Roman Empire, I’d like to discuss the dissolution of the Empire on the 213th Anniversary of the ending of the Empire.

The dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire occurred de facto on August 6, 1806, when Emperor Franz II abdicated his Imperial title and released all imperial states and officials from their oaths and obligations to the empire. Although the abdication was considered legal, the dissolution of the imperial bonds was not and several states refused to recognise the end of the empire at the time.

Although today is the date the empire was dissolved, in many ways it was a mere formality as the empire had been deteriorating since the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 that ended the Thirty Years War. The treaty gave the numerous states within the empire autonomy, ending the empire in all but name. The Swiss Confederation, which had already established quasi-independence in 1499, as well as the Northern Netherlands, also left the Empire at this juncture. The Habsburg Emperors then began to focus on consolidating their own estates in Austria and elsewhere.

By the reign of Louis XIV of France in the mid 17th and early 18th centuries, France began to surpass the Holy Roman Empire as the dominant power in Europe. Also, the Habsburgs were chiefly dependent on their hereditary lands to counter the recent rise of Prussia; some of whose territories lay inside the Empire. Throughout the 18th century, the Habsburgs were embroiled in various European conflicts, such as the War of the Spanish Succession, the War of the Polish Succession, and the War of the Austrian Succession. The German dualism between Austria and Prussia dominated the empire’s history in the 18th century as the two states vied for supremecy over the German lands.

From 1792 onwards, revolutionary France was at war with various parts of the Empire intermittently. 1792 was also the year Holy Roman Emperor Leopold II died and was succeeded by his son as Emperor Franz II, the last Holy Roman Emperor.

Franz II, Holy Roman Emperor and Emperor of Austria.

Franz II (February 12, 1768 – March 2, 1835) born in Florence, the capital of Tuscany, where his father reigned as Grand Duke at the time. His parents were Emperor Leopold II (1747–1792) and his wife Maria Luisa of Spain (1745–1792), (daughter of King Carlos III of Spain, Naples and Sicily and Princess Maria Amalia of Saxony, a daughter of the newly elected Polish king Augustus III and his (ironically) Austrian wife Maria Josepha of Austria.) Though Franz had a happy childhood surrounded by his many siblings, his family knew He was likely to be a future Emperor (his uncle Emperor Joseph II had no surviving issue from either of his two marriages), and so in 1784 the young Archduke Franz was sent to the Imperial Court in Vienna to educate and prepare him for his future role.

As Emperor and the leader of the large multi-ethnic Habsburg Empire, Franz II felt threatened by Napoleon’s social and political reforms, which were being exported throughout Europe with the expansion of the first French Empire. Franz had a fraught relationship with France. His aunt Marie Antoinette, the wife of Louis XVI and Queen consort of France, was guillotined by the revolutionaries in 1793, at the beginning of his reign. Franz, on the whole, was indifferent to her fate (she was not close to his father, Leopold II and although Franz had met her, he had been too young at the time to have any memory of his aunt). Georges Danton attempted to negotiate with the Emperor for Marie Antoinette’s release, but Franz was unwilling to make any concessions in return.

Napoleon, Emperor of the French.

In 1804, with the growing ambitions of Napoleon, who had himself proclaimed Emperor of France that year, Franz, knowing the end of the Holy Roman Empire was drawing nigh, established the Austrian Empire and became Franz I, the first Emperor of Austria, ruling from 1804 to 1835. This act made him the only Doppelkaiser (double emperor) in history.For the two years between 1804 and 1806, Franz used the title and style by the Grace of God elected Roman Emperor, ever Augustus, hereditary Emperor of Austria and he was called the Emperor of both the Holy Roman Empire and Austria. He was also Apostolic King of Hungary, Croatia and Bohemia as Franz I.

With Napoleon’s victory over Austria at the Battle of Austerlitz on December 2, 1805, the French Emperor “transformed himself from the guarantor of the Reich to the arbiter of its fate.” The subsequent Peace of Pressburg (December 26) created deliberate ambiguities in the imperial constitution. Bavaria, Baden and Württemberg were to have full sovereignty while remaining a part of the Germanic Confederation, a novel name for the Empire.

With the the signing of the Peace of Pressburg Emperor Franz II recognized the kingly titles assumed by the Electors of Bavaria and Württemberg, which foreshadowed the end of the Holy Roman Empire. At this point, he believed his position as Holy Roman Emperor to be untenable, so on August 6, 1806, he abdicated the throne, declaring the empire to be already dissolved in the same declaration. This was a political move to impair the legitimacy of the new entity, the Confederation of the Rhine, which had been created by Napoleon.

After the defeat of Napoleon the major European powers convened the Congress of Vienna. The objective of the Congress was to provide a long-term peace plan for Europe by settling critical issues arising from the French Revolutionary Wars and the Napoleonic Wars. The goal was not simply to restore old boundaries but to resize the main powers so they could balance each other and remain at peace. The last Holy Roman Emperor Franz II, in his role as Emperor of Austria served as the first president of the German Confederation following its confirmation by the Congress in 1815.

Confederation of the Rhine

Survival of Monarchies: Prussia part III

Tags

Baden, Bavaria, Confederation of the Rhine, Congress of Vienna, German Confederation, Germany, Holy Roman Empire, Napoleon, Prussia

After the fall of the Holy Roman Empire the question of German unity became inevitable. But how to unify such a patchwork quilt of nation states? Prior to the end of the empire some states within its boundaries were elevated in rank. Bavaria, Saxony, and Württemberg became Kingdoms under the influence of Napoleon. Baden became a Grand Duchy and after the Napoleonic wars, Hanover also became a kingdom. The real question was would it be Prussia or Austria to gain the upper hand and unit Germany under their authority?

From 1806 until 1813 the German States formed the Confederation of the Rhine without the inclusion of Austria and Prussia. The Confederation was to be run by common constitutional bodies, but the individual states wanted unlimited sovereignty. This loose confederation suffered some of the same problems the old Holy Roman Empire suffered from and that is there was not a strong central government.

The Holy Roman Emperor had at its head an Emperor. The Confederation, since it was not considered an empire was ruled by Karl Theodor von Dalberg, the former Arch Chancellor of the Holy Roman Empire and he carried the of a Prince-Primate of the confederation. This made him President of the College of Kings and presided over the Diet of the Confederation, designed to be a parliament-like body though it never actually assembled. The President of the Council of the Princes was held the Prince oef Nassau-e. At its heart the Confederation was a conservative minded military alliance. As mentioned, this body was under the influence of Napoleon who elevated many of the states to Kingdom status. During its short existence the members of the confederation found themselves more subordinated to Napoleon than they had been to the Habsburgs.

The Confederation of the Rhine collapsed in 1813, with the aftermath of Napoleon’s failed campaign against the Russian Empire. Many of its members changed sides after the Battle of Leipzig, when it became apparent Napoleon would lose the War of the Sixth Coalition. In 1814 the major European powers gathered in Vienna for the Congress of Vienna which redrew the map of Europe after the defeat of Napoleon. German unity did not come at this juncture but instead we saw the creation of the German Confederation with both Austria and Prussia included. The Habsburg Emperor of Austria was its nominal head, holding the title of President of the Confederation.

This Confederation, which was basically the old Holy Roman Empire in all but name, lasted until 1866 when Prussia began to consolidate its power among the German states and began the path of unification without Austria. Prior to that, in 1848, there was an attempt to create a more liberal unified German Empire. That is what we will look at in depth next week.

Napoleon I, Emperor of the French

Tags

Archduchess Marie Louise, Carl XIII of Sweden, Emperor of the French, Jean Baptiste Jules Bernadotte, Joséphine de Beauharnais, Napoleon, Napoleon Bonaparte, Napoleon complex, Napoleon I, Napoleonic Wars, oséphine de Beauharnais

In today’s featured monarch section I thought I would focus on Napoleon. I will be upfront and say I am not crazy about this guy although I must admit what he did greatly impacted European history and the events surrounding him are fascinating. His presence and ambitions forced the collapse of the Holy Roman Empire. I always wondered if the end of the empire was inevitable? Had Napoleon never come along would their still be a Holy Roman Empire? Napoleon changed the history of and the map of Europe. I feel his biggest impact was in France and Germany. One of the reasons I do not care for him is because I have a hard time thinking of him as royal. To me the ancient regime of the lines of Hugh Capét were the legitimate sovereigns of France and I see the French Empire as mere usurpers. As with many things in life to the victor goes the ability to make the rules!

Napoleon was born on August 15, 1769 in the town of Ajaccio, Corsica. He was the was the second of eight children to his parents Carlo Bonaparte and Letizia Ramolino. Napoleon became a French national at the right time seeing that the Italian island of Corsica had been occupied by French forces under the command of the Comte de Vaux in 1768 and 1769. His family was of the Italian nobility, attached to Tuscany. At a young age Napoleon joined the French military as an artillery officer and his natural talent and skill for the military allowed him to rise to prominence under the France’s First Republic. He proved himself in many campaigns against the First and Second Coalitions arrayed against France. It was in 1799 that his star really began to rise when he staged a coup d’état and installed himself as First Consul. Five years later he had the French Senate proclaimed him emperor. His lust for power and land was almost boundless. The first fifteen years of the the 19th century was caught up in a series of conflicts, known as the Napoleonic Wars, that would involve every major European power.

His tumultuous relationship with his first wife, Joséphine de Beauharnais, has become fuel for legend. In order to give himself an heir, along with more power and prestige, he chose as his second wife Archduchess Marie Louise, daughter of Franz II, The last Holy Roman Emperor and first Emperor of Austria. They had one son, Napoleon II, who lived his life in exile in Austria after his father’s defeat. There were rumors that Napoleon II, who become Franz, Duke of Reichstadt in Austria, was the actual father of Archduke Maximilian of Austria and Emperor of Mexico, and brother of Austrian Emperor Franz Joseph. This rumor has never been substantiated.

Napoleon certainly had enemies. Czar Alexander I saw his aim in his life was to defeat Napoleon, whom he called “the oppressor of Europe and the disturber of the world’s peace.” Napoleon set up many of his relatives as puppet kings. Jerome was made the king of Westphalia a kingdom carved out of Prussian territory. He set up his brother Joseph as the king of Spain. One positive repercussion of Napoleon’s campaigns was that Sweden got a new royal family that still sits on the throne today. A French General, Jean Baptiste Jules Bernadotte, was very popular in Sweden for the kindness he showed Swedish prisoners in a recent campaign against Denmark. With the elderly and childless king Carl XIII of Sweden needing and heir, and with the Swedish government looking for a soldier, Bernadotte was elected Crown Prince of Sweden in 1810 and became king of Sweden and Norway in 1818.

Napoleon’s ambitions were finally thwarted on the battlefield of Waterloo in 1815 when he was soundly defeated by a multinational army lead by the Arthur Wellesley, Duke of Wellington. He was exiled once again, after having been defeated and exiled the previous year and he died on the isle of Saint Helena on May 3, 1821 at the age of only 51. His first escape from exile in 1814 interrupted the Congress of Vienna which had convened to try to repair the dame from the the Napoleonic Wars and the collapse of the Holy Roman Empire. The rightful kings of France were restored and Germany was sent on its slow path to unification.

I find Napoleon amazing in that he did so much in such a short life. I also find his lust for power fascinating. With my background in psychology Napoleon makes an interesting study. He has given his name to a disorder, the Napoleon Complex: This is from wikipedia.

Napoleon complex is an informal term describing an alleged type of which is said to affect some people, especially men, who are short in stature. The term is also used more generally to describe people who are driven by a perceived handicap to overcompensate in other aspects of their lives. Other names for the term include Napoleon syndrome[1] and Short Man syndrome. It does not appear in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM).

Although not a true disorder I do know some men who do struggle with issues of height. But was his aggressive need for power compensating for some lack in his life? Was it a drive for self-esteem? A poor self image can plague many people and what better way to bolster a shaky self-image than to proclaim ones self to be an Emperor?

 

 

What makes a Kingdom?

Tags

Adolph of Luxembourg, Baden, Holy Roman Empire, Kingdom, Luxembourg, Napoleon, Reichsdeputationshauptschluss, the Netherlands, Württemberg, Willem III of the Netherlands

This entry is more about examining some unanswered questions than and observations. Throughout European history many kingdoms have come and gone. What has intrigued me is the decisions for some of these realms to be a kingdom while some held lower titles. The thing that intrigues me is that there are no hard, set-in-stone, criteria for what state or territory should be called a kingdom. Geographical size and population do not seem to matter. Here is a dictionary definition of a kingdom.

king·dom  [king-duhm]
noun
1. a state or government having a king or queen as its head.
2. anything conceived as constituting a realm or sphere of independent action or control: the kingdom of thought.
3. a realm or province of nature, especially one of the three broad divisions of natural objects: the animal, vegetable, and mineral kingdoms.
4. Biology . a taxonomic category of the highest rank, grouping together all forms of life having certain fundamental characteristics in common: in the five-kingdom classification scheme adopted by many biologists, separate kingdoms are assigned to animals (Animalia), plants (Plantae), fungi (Fungi), protozoa and eucaryotic algae (Protista), and bacteria and blue-green algae (Monera).
the spiritual sovereignty of God or Christ.

Here is the definition of a realm from Wikipedia.

A realm ( /ˈrɛlm/) is a community or territory over which a sovereign rules; it is commonly used to describe a kingdom or other monarchical or dynastic state.

The Old French word reaume, modern French royaume, was the word first adopted in English; the fixed modern spelling does not appear until the beginning of the 17th century. The word supposedly derives from medieval Latin regalimen, from regalis, of or belonging to a rex, (king).[1]
“Realm” is particularly used for those states whose name includes the word kingdom (for example, the United Kingdom), to avoid clumsy repetition of the word in a sentence (for example, “The Queen’s realm, the United Kingdom…”). It is also useful to describe those countries whose monarchs are called something other than “king” or “queen”; for example, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg is a realm but not a kingdom since its monarch holds the title Grand Duke rather than King.

From my research it seems who holds the title of a king or queen is pretty arbitrary. I have read that only an emperor can grant the title of king or queen. However, that doesn’t seem to be true. The Congress of Vienna created the Electorate of Hanover a kingdom in 1814 and I do not think any emperor granted that title. In 1830 Belgium became a sovereign state and decided upon a constitutional monarchy and chose Leopold of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha to be their king. They could have just as easily have called Belgium a Grand Duchy although I don’t think Leopold would have been happy with a lesser title.

Speaking of separation of states and titles, in 1890, when King Willem III of the Netherlands died, he was also the Grand Duke of Luxembourg, but because Luxembourg went by the Salic Law which barred women from ruling in their own right, the throne of the Netherlands went to Willem III’s daughter, Queen Wilhelmina, while Luxembourg went to the the nearest male relative, Adolphus of Nassau-Weilburg. I always wondered, with Luxembourg now separate from the Netherlands could they have elevated their rulers title to that of king?

One of the more curious discrepancies (from my point of view) over the creations of a kingdom and its arbitrary nature is between the states of Baden and Württemberg. For a long period of their respective histories within the Holy Roman Empire both Baden and Württemberg were duchies. However, it must be noted that during that portion of their history Baden was not unified and several lines of the House of Zähringen ruled over Baden. It became unified under Duke Carl-Friedrich of Baden-Durlach after the death of August-Georg of Baden-Baden in 1771 without heirs.

In 1803 came the Reichsdeputationshauptschluss which was a redistribution and restructuring of the empire which resulted in the secularization of ecclesiastical principalities and mediatisation of numerous small secular principalities and Free Imperial Cities. This act created more imperial electors (those in charge of electing the emperor) and the rulers of both Baden and Württemberg were made electors of the empire.

However, this new reorganization of the empire was short lived for within three years the empire itself was dissolved. As the empire was dissolving in those early years of the 19th century, the rulers of Baden and Württemberg sided with Napoleon who had his carving knives out eager to incorporate former German territories into his empire. For their support of Napoleon both of their territories were expanded and titles were elevated. This is where the arbitrary nature of the what constitutes a kingdom come in. Baden became a Grand Duchy while Württemberg became a kingdom. Even though Württemberg was the larger territory, although not by much, both states had been a duchy and then briefly an electorate within the empire. The same situation existed in Saxony. It too, became a kingdom after having been an electorate and this state was even smaller than Baden. So why was Württemberg and Saxony elevated to kingdom status while Baden became only a Grand Duchy? I have never found an answer to that question. I wonder if it was ever considered to raise Baden to the kingdom?

Questions like these make history fun for me. History often talks about what happened I like to find out why things happened the way they did.

 

 

Pretenders to the Throne ~ France, Part II.

Tags

Comte de Chambord, Duke of Anjou, France, French pretenders, Henri VII, Kingdom, Louis XX, Napoleon, Napoleon III, Third Republic

Picking up where we left of yesterday we saw Louis Philippe mount the throne of France. While I do admit that his succession was in violation of the traditional laws of the kingdom he did come to power during a revolution and it seems that in revolutions most laws are off the books and it in a time of upheaval the revolutionaries get to set the new rules.

Louis Philippe’s reign lasted about 18 years when once more revolution struck France and the king fell from power. The heir to the French throne, Prince Ferdinand Duc d’Orléans died in a carriage accident in 1842 leaving his son, grandson of the king, Prince Philippe d’Orléans as heir. The National Assembly of France was willing to accept Philippe as king but the tide of opinion toward the monarchy was very negative and instead France was once again proclaimed a Republic.

The second Republic was replaced by the second Empire under Napoleon III. Once that regime collapsed during the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-71 France once again turned toward the House of Bourbon with the intent of restoring the royal line of French kings. The vast majority of French monarchists accepted the claims of Henri V, Comte de Chambord as the legitimate pretender to the throne. Henri was childless and not likely to father any children so many regarded Philippe d’Orléans as Henri’s eventual and rightful heir. The National Assembly and Henri could not reach agreement on the nature of his rule and what rights and powers he would have. Also, Henri, insisted he reign under the white flag of the House of Bourbon and not the tri-colored flag of the revolution. Unable to reach agreement a Third Republic was proclaimed. There was a belief that a restoration of Philippe to the French throne would occur after Henri’s death but Henri lived until 1883 and by that time support for the monarchy had declined (they lost the majority in Parliament in 1877) to the point where a continuation of the Third Republic was the most favorable option.

The vast majority of French monarchists supported the Orléans claimant while a faction of those that did not support the Orléans claim supported the descendents of Felipe V of Spain. These supporters, called Legitimists, believe in the fundamental laws of the kingdom and that a French prince cannot legally give up his rights to the throne. Therefore the renunciation of Philippe Duc d’Anjou (King Felipe V of Spain) of his rights were invalid according to the laws of France at the time. With the death of Henri V in 1883 the Legitimist pretender was Juan, Count of Montizón who was the senior heir general to King Louis XIV. Spain was also experiencing civil discord with the Carlists War, which did not legally recognize Queen Isabel II’s right to the Spanish throne due to Felipe V instituting the Salic Law in Spain, which was abolished by King Fernando VII in 1829 by his wife, Maria Christina of Bourbon-Two Sicilies, in order for their daughter Isabel to succeed to the Crown.

Today the representative of the Spanish line for the French crown is HRH Prince Louis Alphonse of Bourbon, Duke of Anjou. He is a great-grand son of King Alfonso XIII of Spain and through his mother he is a great-grandson of Spain’s former dictator Francisco Franco. He is first cousin once removed to Spain’s current king, Juan Carlos. To his Legitimist supporters he is King Louis XX of France. All titles he holds are in pretense as he does not hold any legal title in Spain and is not a member of the Spanish Royal Family. He is married to María Margarita Vargas Santaella and they have three children, twin boys, Louis and Alphonse and a daughter Eugénie.

The Orléans representative is HRH Prince Henri VII d’ Orléans, Comte de Paris, Duc de France. He is a descendent of King Louis Philippe. His first marriage was to Duchess Marie Therese of Württemberg, daughter of HRH Prince Philipp Albrecht, Duke of Württemberg (himself a claimant to the throne of Württemberg) and Archduchess Rosa of Austria, Princess of Tuscany. They had five children. The eldest son, Prince François of Orléans, Count of Clermont, is not heir to his father’s claim due to mental difficulties developed because of toxoplasmosis during pregnancy. Henri’s heir is his second son, Prince Jean, Duke of Vendôme, and is married to Philomena de Tornos Steinhart and they have two children, Prince Gaston and Princess Antoinette.

Royal Numbering ~ Germany

Tags

Charlemagne, England, Ernest Augustus, George I, George II, George III, Germany, Hanover, Holy Roman Empire, Kingdom, Kingdom of Hanover, Napoleon, Otto I the Great, Scotland, William IV

Royal Numbering ~ Germany

Germany is a unique example in the topic of monarchy and with numbering their rulers. Unlike Britain and France and other states of Europe, Germany was slow in become a centralized nation-state. For centuries Germany was more of a geographical term than a name attached to a centralized nation state. Similar to France German history has its roots in the old Kingdom of the Franks. The Treaty of Verdun in 843 divided the Charlemagne’s empire. The eastern half of the kingdom retained the imperial title and from this entity evolved the Holy Roman Empire.

Even though Charlemagne is considered the Fist Holy Roman Emperor when he was crown Emperor on Christmas Day 800CE that state was something that developed through the centuries. I remember one historian saying that Charlemagne’s empire, thought to have reestablished the Western Roman Empire, was in reality was a state without a name. In 843 when the empire was divided the monarchs of the eastern half were titled Regnum Francorum Orientalium or Francia Orientalis: the Kingdom of the Eastern Franks. This Kingdom of East Francia lasted from 843 until 911 under the Carolingian Dynasty and the rise of the Ottonian Dynasty.

The imperial title lapsed after the death of Berengar I in 924 and would not be revived until Otto I, Duke of Saxony was crowned Emperor in 962. This is when the majority of historians believe the Holy Roman Empire began. The empire was a loose conglomeration of states with their own leaders who held titles either directly or indirectly from the emperor. The monarchy was elective but in practice it did become hereditary within certain dynasties with the election become a mere formality. The Archdukes of Austria of the Habsburg Dynasty held the title the longest. As territories merged or were annexed the rulers still held their titles and a right to sit in the imperial diet even though they no longer ruled over territory. There is not any discrepancy for the numbering of the emperors but there are some minor discrepancies and inconsistencies for the lesser states.

One of the places where there is a discrepancy in numbering is the Kingdom of Hanover. Prior to its elevation as a kingdom Hanover was an Imperial Electorate within the Holy Roman Empire ruled by a cadet line of the House of Guelph that ruled the various Brunswick duchies. In 1692 Emperor Leopold I installed Duke Ernst August of Brunswick-Lüneburg as Prince-Elector of Hanover. In 1698 Elector Ernst August was succeeded by his eldest son who became Elector Georg Ludwig of Hanover. In 1714 via the provisions of the Act of Settelment of 1701 in England and Scotland Georg Ludwig became King George I of Great Britain. In Hanover and Great Britain the numbering for these King-Electors was the same. In 1727 George I was succeeded by his son as George II and in 1760 his grandson succeeded him as George III.

In 1806 the Holy Roman Empire came to an end and Hanover became part of the Kingdom of Westphalia, a puppet state founded by Napoleon. After the defeat of Napoleon the Congress of Vienna restored George III to his Hanoverian territories and elevated Hanover to a Kingdom. Instead of starting a new numbering of as Kings of Hanover George III still retained his ordinal number. In 1820 George III was succeeded by his son who became George IV of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Hanover. In 1837 George IV was succeeded by his brother William IV who was known as Wilhelm I of Hanover.

Since succession to Hanover was governed by the Salic Law which barred women from inheriting the throne the personal union between Great Britain and Hanover ended in 1837 with the death of William IV. William IV was succeeded in Great Britain by his niece, Victoria, who reigned in Britain until 1901 and gave her name to the entire era. In Hanover the crown went to another brother of William IV, Ernest Augustus, Duke of Cumberland.

This is where it gets tricky. In my view he should have been been called Ernst August II because the numbering for Hanover began with Ernst August in 1692. However, Ernst August was only an Elector in 1692 and never a King. His son, George I, was the first Hanoverian to hold the royal title of King…although he was a King of Great Britain not a King of Hanover. So it appears that the royal numbering of Hanover follows those with the title of King regardless if the person was not a King of Hanover.