A wee bit.

There is a continuous territorial, legal and sovereign connection between the Crown of Edward Confessor, and the Norman-Angivan-Plantagenet-Tudor-Stuart-Hannover-Saxe Coburg-Mountbatten-Windsor line. And yes, I left a couple names out.

The Commonwealth under Cromwell does not break the sequence, it merely established Parliamentary supremacy over it.

His wife is not the mother of his royal children. Have you seen the mother of his royal children? She was a real beauty in every sense of the word.

Besides, that Prince Charles has an ugly wife or is batty proves nothing.

As for the assertion, I'm afraid you're going to have to do your own research on this one. My assertion is based upon a rough count of idiots born to the Habsburgs and Bourbons in the 1470 to 1725 period, according to historical geneological tables. Habsburg idiot-borns beat Bourbon idiot-borns 2:1, though I admit, it is difficult to draw a consistent rule as to how to count them since some were only half-idiots and do you count cousins?

Incidentally, it was the mad-Bourbon-idiot line that ultimately killed off the Plantagenet dynasty when Henry V married into the French Royal line and produced Henry VI, a half-idiot child-King for England. Given the course of history, one might consider this act of France an early form of successful gene-warfare!

And yes, the Scots had quite a few royal idiots too (probably due to marrying to the French line).

Yes, this is mostly true - though I don't see much evidence of corruption at all (not in a conventional monetary sense) in any of the European Royals.

However, this is not absolutely or always true. Monarchs are as relevant as they make themselves to be. Elizabeth II of Britain happens to be a very mediocre monarch, and thus, with her premiere position and long life, she is setting a standard for mediocre and boring monarchs these days that all of the remaining European royals seem to be following. There's no reason that they must always act this way.

I don't think anyone's complaining here, either. Being responsible for maintenance of the cultural kind of state property myself, I know alot who complain about deterioating and moldering buildings but that's just until they're reminded of the only source of funding, - their own tax-money
Heck, we even pulled entrance fees two years ago and it made no difference as to the available funds (mainly because any revenue ends up in the big pile anyway, though).

12€? You're right, that's not cheap. Do you know if that's the only source of funding for exhibition and maintenance?

*coffee splatter*

Oh man, I choose the right one to discuss this... I mean me, having no real idea of that whole stuff and you who are involved in running such a thing

What I know is that Schloss Schönbrunn is also a place where people live, ie its also a totally normal residential. I have no idea how many but as the complex is quite large there might be quite a few appartments. Also in the rooms of the main building above the belle etage. Those rooms were in the monarchy for the staff who run the Schloss.
But I did not mention that because the state does not make a fortune with that. Many of the people who live there do so already for many many decades. The money they have to pay for it has not changed much in the time, so the live in the Schloss cheaper than most people outside of it. Only if the appartments get new owners the prices get up to somewhat realistical numbers. (I looked it up, in sum its 190 appartments)

But you must not forget, that not only the building itself costs, but also the gardens. The parc is quite expensive to run, and there is no entrance for it as it is a public parc.
I am not sure those two things are run by the same institution. Most parcs in Vienna are run by the city, but those with highest importance and a high cultural value are run by an instution on national level.

Regarding the whole Schönbrunn complex including the gardens and everything on it (Zoo, Palmenhaus etc) there are 6.7 mio visitors each year. The Schloss itself is visited by 1.5 mio people.

The admission fees are quite confusing. I better link it to you directly:
Schloß Schönbrunn- Admission charges

The cheapest way to get a standard tarif ticket is the small audio tour (9,50), the large audio tour costs 12,90 €. And with a guide you pay 15,40 €.
And the all inlclusive offer for all attractions in Schönbrunn cost nice and neat 36 €.

I looked at the homepage, but the company that runs the Schloss did not mention state subsidies. It mentioned however that the fees have been risen considerably, and also that rents for events, souvenirs and catering brought in their share. And the spending side there is a renovation program worth 73 mio €

__________________
When the Nazis came for the communists I remained silent, I was no communist.
When the Nazis came for the Unionists I remained silent, I was no Unionist.
When the Nazis came for the Social Democrats I remained silent, I was no Social Democrat.
When the Nazis came for the Jews I remained silent, I was no Jew.
When the Nazis came for me, there was no one left who could protest.

As far as I know, the Austrian Habsburgs had no inherited insanity. It was the Spanish line that had, which was reinforced by cousin marriages for generations, thus inbreeding.

You also have to read my post in its context, it was to compare the alleged insanity of present day Prince Charles of England with the known insanity of some Habsurgers just because Charles "talks to plants".

__________________
President Josiah Bartlet: Sweden has a 100% literacy rate. 100%! How do they do that?
Leo McGarry: Maybe they don't and they can't add.

That's true as far as it goes, but it only applies to England. Edward the Confessor was contemporaneous with Malcolm III (Mael-Cheum Ceann-Mor). The Scottish crown is older than the English, in fact the English crown was subsumed into the Scottish in 1603.


Again, sorry, neither Parliament nor Crown hold supremacy (or sovereignty) over the people - this is a quaint Scottish idea - the people are sovereign, parliaments exist to serve the people.


Their maternity is not in question, paternity, however..........


This is undeniable, although most of them were of the Stuart line.

I must challenge your terminology here, Big ears is, unfortunately, not "Prince Charles of England", he is the "Heir Apparent" to the throne of the United Kingdom - an entity which comprises (at the moment), Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Incidentally the designation Elizabeth II worn by the current incumbent of that throne is inaccurate - she is in reality Elizabeth I.

I know, and I am sorry for hurting your feelings when I was incorrect. However, I suppose nobody doubt who I mean. If I would have written "Prince Charles of Wales" or "of the UK" it would probably have been better.

__________________
President Josiah Bartlet: Sweden has a 100% literacy rate. 100%! How do they do that?
Leo McGarry: Maybe they don't and they can't add.

Oh, but that's no guarantee that I know what I'm talking about

Thanks for all the information. There are indeed some heavy duty projects going on at the Schloss and I bet that many similar projects are on the drawing board now and, well, forever Maintenance never rests.

Looks interesting. I may have to visit Vienna sometime.

Well, I know that your line of argumentation was serious. But there are others here, who argument in a different kind.

I dont think you would claim that the house of Habsburg (Austrian line) was one single chain of ugliness, idiocy and insaneness combined with total political inabilities. Like others here do, would you?

__________________
When the Nazis came for the communists I remained silent, I was no communist.
When the Nazis came for the Unionists I remained silent, I was no Unionist.
When the Nazis came for the Social Democrats I remained silent, I was no Social Democrat.
When the Nazis came for the Jews I remained silent, I was no Jew.
When the Nazis came for me, there was no one left who could protest.

If it looks like a troll, smells like a troll and acts like a troll... what is it?

Thanks for the compliments.
Hehe, I can only support you regarding the idea to visit Vienna You can see then, how brutally we perfectionized making the Habsburgs and their heritage to money

__________________
When the Nazis came for the communists I remained silent, I was no communist.
When the Nazis came for the Unionists I remained silent, I was no Unionist.
When the Nazis came for the Social Democrats I remained silent, I was no Social Democrat.
When the Nazis came for the Jews I remained silent, I was no Jew.
When the Nazis came for me, there was no one left who could protest.

No, I would not. I cannot see what I would gain from debating in such a manner.

__________________
President Josiah Bartlet: Sweden has a 100% literacy rate. 100%! How do they do that?
Leo McGarry: Maybe they don't and they can't add.

I remember when I was in Vienna on a vacation. There were so many post cards, souvenirs etc. commemorating the old monarchy and monarchs that I felt compelled to ask Austrians if you wanted the monarchy reinstalled. I was sorry to hear - monarchist that I am - that about 80 % of the Austrians did not, according to polls.

__________________
President Josiah Bartlet: Sweden has a 100% literacy rate. 100%! How do they do that?
Leo McGarry: Maybe they don't and they can't add.

There is a strong idea of "the good old times" here. But not up to the point that it becomes surreal.

The self perceptions of Austrians up to this day is that they think of themselves that they understand the central European countries better than other European countries do. Its no random accident that Austria was the first and nowadays is the leading foreign economic actor in many regions of central and eastern Europe. Perhaps because basic ties never broke down, not even during the times of the iron curtain. (just take the example of the Raab-Ödenburg Railway. I dont know how many railways existed during the days of the cold war that crossed the iron curtain on a very regular basis, but this was one that did)

Of course this self perception could be a terrible malconception, I never had the chance to discuss this was any "Altösterreicher" (literally old-Austrian, ie all former citizens of the Austrian monarchy). I just know that Austria was a stiff supporter (at least the politicians) of the east enlargement, and is even today also for example Croatias strongeset allied in the accession procedure to the EU.

Otto Habsburg the theoratical heir of the throne (if he had not put down his claims in the 60's or so) is not by random a mentionworthy figure of European unification. There are many people who say, not only him, that the EU is on the best way to become what the Austrian-Hungarian monarchy would have involved into for the case that it had survived. A confederation in which all the peoples are partners and have the right of running their own realms, while having also a common basis to work together where it is of advantage. It lacks of course a pan European monarch, but who knows if not the Austrian monarchy as well would have transformed itself into a republican confederacy.


The Habsburger had really bad luck in the end. The Austrofascists really planned to reestablish the Habsburg throne. The feared however an invasion from Czechoslovakia or the German Reich if they would only invite Otto v. Habsburg to the country. So it did not take place.
In Hungary chances were even better for Otto to become king again, but the General who promised the reinstitution of the monarchy forgot that promise after he gripped the power himself.

After WWII Hungary was no option anymore with the communists at power, and in Austria, people where busy with everything (forgetting the own history of 1938-1945, rebuilding the country, rebuilding the republic, burrying the people, getting the war inmates back again, end the allied occupation...) but not with reestablishing the monarchy. An important point also might be that Austria was occupied 10 years, and the allied powers were probably not to eager to see the monarchy coming back to Austria. As the Habsburger were so deeply connected with the multiple peoples state, that not only the former parts of the monarchy feared that the throne might lead to new claims from the side of Austria. After the ten years however, when the occupation ended, the republic worked already smoothly and was well established. The socialists became an important power and they would have preferred to die before letting the monarchy rearise again out of ashes.


The motto of modern Austria might be: "We dont have monarchs, but we have their jewels" And we certainly are proud of having their jewels


PS:
I really would be interested how Hungarians nowadays think about a reastablishing of the monarchy with a symbolic Habsburg monarch. After all, an integration figure that keeps itself very distant from all partisan quarrels, would not be a bad thing for contemporary Hungary.
I just dont know how unpopular (or not) the Habsburg were and are in Hungary.

I only know that Sisi was very very popular in Hungary.

As theoratical concept I think a transnational constiutional monarchic confederacy would be a very exciting concept. Well, Belgium is on its best way to that configeration though...

__________________
When the Nazis came for the communists I remained silent, I was no communist.
When the Nazis came for the Unionists I remained silent, I was no Unionist.
When the Nazis came for the Social Democrats I remained silent, I was no Social Democrat.
When the Nazis came for the Jews I remained silent, I was no Jew.
When the Nazis came for me, there was no one left who could protest.