Template talk:Carlist Pretenders

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Problems with the title[edit]

Hi, in my opinion, the title "Carlist Pretenders" is misleading: most of the included pretenders are not Carlist. I am doubting even about the grouping itself, lot of the included pretenders have a low weighting (IMHO). --Maañón (talk) 20:08, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree. In particular, I'm not sure that the bottom three rows in this table ("Spanish Royal claimants", "Legitimist claimants", and "Habsburg claimants") are actually "Carlists" at all. — Lawrence King (talk) 00:15, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
Correction to what I wrote: All the rows are correct, although their names were misleading. For example, the Bourbon line (including Juan Carlos) were recognized by some Carlists as the legimite Carlist heirs, even though they themselves did not claim the throne through such logic. Details in Carlism#Carlist claimants to the throne. — Lawrence King (talk) 02:05, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Problems with the "Majority claimants" row[edit]

There are two problems with the "Majority claimants" row.

(1) The end of the reign of Javier I (Prince Xavier of Bourbon-Parma) is given as 1977, the year he died. Shouldn't this be 1972, the year when he relinquished leadership of the Carlists to his oldest son Carlos Hugo I (Carlos Hugo, Duke of Parma)? In that case, Carlos Hugo's "reign" should say "1972-2010."

(2) In 1977, this "majority claimant" line split in two. Some Carlists recognized Carlos Hugo as the monarch until his death in 2010, at which point he was succeeded by his son Carlos Javier II (Carlos, Duke of Parma). However, other Carlists refused to recognize Carlos Hugo as their leader due to his rejection of traditional Carlist ideology, and preferred his younger brother Prince Sixtus Henry of Bourbon-Parma (Sixto Enrique I), who is still alive. I have added this information to the table. But I am wondering if Sixtus I should actually be listed on a separate row. If so, what should the new row be entitled? — Lawrence King (talk) 00:24, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Update: After some more research, I answered my question # 2: at present, it seems that two separate rows for the Bourbon-Parma line are not needed, because Sixtus has stated that he would prefer that one of Carlos Hugo's sons be the Carlist heir, as long as they agree to the traditional Carlist view. So it seems (tentatively) that these two sub-lines of the Bourbon-Parma line have not fully split. What do others think of this question? — Lawrence King (talk) 02:03, 27 May 2012 (UTC)