I only know how to spell this phoneticaly but does any one know anything about the Kingdom of "Utramer" literaly meaning over the sea. I have heard it lasted a long time with its own dynasty and such any information would be much apprecaited. :help:
Printable View
I only know how to spell this phoneticaly but does any one know anything about the Kingdom of "Utramer" literaly meaning over the sea. I have heard it lasted a long time with its own dynasty and such any information would be much apprecaited. :help:
It's just the good ol' crusader states. Outremer means in french "overseas" ("outre" being derived from the latin word "ultra" and all).
Wikipedia's take: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outremer
So it was not one specific place but just a collective term for all of them. If so thanks for the help.
More specifically, kingdom of Jerusalem, Principate of Antioch, County of Edessa, County of Tripolis.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mithradates
Thanks history knowing people!
And Kingdom of Jerusalem later transformed into Kingdom of Cyprus.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosacrux redux
The heirs to which continued to claim the title of King of Jerusalem. And still do to the present day with several current claimants, including:Quote:
Originally Posted by DukeofSerbia
King Juan Carlos of Spain
Otto von Hapsburg - heir to the last Emperor of Austria
Victor Emmanuel IV - head of the House of Savoy and exiled heir to the King of Italy
Prince Ferdinando Maria - Duke of Castro
and
Carlos - Duke of Calabria
Both claimants to the title King of the Two Sicilies
Otto von Hapsburg relinquished his claims to the throne. That was the only way he was allowed back into his country. He was in exile in the US for quite some time. I think he got elected to the parliment there or something once he relinquished his claims to the throne. I'm not sure on that one though.
Thanks for that inf Lion Pariya.
I knew Otto von Hapsburg was in the U.S. during WWII. He vehemently opposed the annexation of Austria by Nazi Germany. And I knew he had been elected to the EU parlaiment back in the 90's for a Bavarian party; but I didn't realize he'd relinquished his claims. I suppose that means that the claim passed to his son Karl, instead of his older daughters. I wonder if the son, Karl von Hapsburg, renounced his claims also?
As far as I could deduct from several websites on the subject, Otto relinquished his claim to the Austrian throne in 1961, and gave up the leadership of the Order of the Golden Fleece to his son Karl in 2000. Otto is apperently, however, still the head of the house of Habsburg. Also, it seems he never relinquished his claims to the Hungarian throne, so I guess it would not be unreasonable to say he probably also didn't relinquish his claim to that of Jerusalem. I could however imagine that he couldn't care less. And Karl von Habsburg (or, in Austria: Karl Habsburg-Lothringen, without the 'von'), at any rate, seems to be rather active again in Austria: he was in the European Parliament for the ÖVP.
Does anyone else have some more info (some actual Austrians, perhaps)?
I second that, anyone about from Austria? It seems to me that Karl lives in Austria. In order to do that, I would think he'd have to relinquish at least his claim to the throne of Austria, by Austrian law. From what I can tell, Otto lives not in Austria, but in Bavaria somewhere. It also seems that, as usual, monarchists who support both don't recognize the authority of monarchs to abdicate their rule at the requests of governments which they don't see as legitimate in the first place. That usually ends up causing confusion and multiple claims to the same throne (as in the Legitimists and Orleanists and several others have for the claim to the throne of France).
Sorry to derail the thread this far. I'm just fascinated by the complications of royal inheritances, with some recognizing primogeniture and some recognizing only male primogeniture and some male only but not primogeniture and so on; confused even further by willing and unwilling abdications, usurpers, conquests, legal maneuverings, illegitimate children, multiple marriages, and religion influencing the lot (like in England where anyone in the line of royal succession who marries a Roman Catholic is automatically removed from the succession by a 1701 law). It's complicated and sometimes comical - just what one would expect from royals.
That's precisely why I don't give a rats arse about any sorts of royalties and their claims - nobody can "own" a country besides its people. Damn royal #$@$$!@#%#%## !!!!! ~D
Heh, well I view it as an interesting side subject in the convoluted history of the world. The self-proclaimed nobility (and the religious versions of the same) and their incessant squabbling for their self-proclaimed rights and fighting like junkyard dogs over the little bits of soil which they perceive as their personal property has fueled most of European history and much of the rest of the world as well.
I think in order to go back to his country he had to relinquish some of his claims. Not sure which ones precisely. Then once he returned i supposed he got in the right crowds and got elected to parliment.