Two recent posts worth drawing the attention of readers to on the blogs which I try to find time to read are, firstly, from The Mad Monarchist. This looks at the Austrian Imperial family and their fortunes, not least the possibilities of restoration to the throne, in the years before the Second World War and their situation afterwards. An informative and interesting piece it can be read at The House of Hapsburg in World War II
William Shakespeare, Liturgist
-
The liturgical rearrangement—or in Peter Kwasniewski’s somewhat more
colorful description, the liturgical bloodbath—that recently occurred in
Tyler, Texas,...
1 hour ago
2 comments:
The Mad Monarchist, who I don’t think anyone would ever accuse of being a ‘details person’ is wrong to say that Otto was ever nominally King of Hungary or retained that status until near the end of WWII. Although the Emperor Charles can be said to have nominally remained King until 1921, in that year Hungary repealed the pragmatic sanction, stripping the Hapsburgs of their rights and making the throne vacant. This was, of course, to punish Charles for his attempted armed coup against Horthy.
A good point as to the legal situation in Hungary after 1921. Declaring the throne vacant nade life easier for the Horthy government, even with flirtations with Lord Rothermere. However many hungarians still would have deemed Charles and Otto to be their legitimate monarchs, and after 1989, when such ideas could again be expressed, the Habsburgs continued (and continue) to be seen as the Royal House. Had there been a feasible, realistic chance of a restoration in the inter-war period I cannot imagine it would have been anyone other than Otto who would have been considered.
Post a Comment