Humanities desk
< November 25	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 27 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

November 26

Former thrones that already have or are soon likely to have a succession dispute?

Which cases are there of former thrones (as in, currently non-existent thrones) already having or soon being likely to have a succession dispute? I could think of the dispute over the defunct French throne between the Legitimists, Orleanists, and Bonapartists, the dispute over the defunct Italian throne between the main House of Savoy male line and the more junior (cadet branch) Savoy-Aosta line (a dispute that will become even more exacerbated in the future since the main Savoyard line is going to run out of males sometime this century, given that Emanuele Filiberto of Savoy, Prince of Venice only has two daughters and no sons of his own--something that is not true of the Savoy-Aosta line, which already has two males (sons) born to Prince Aimone, Duke of Apulia in the 21st century), the dispute over the defunct Brazilian throne between the Petropolis and Vassouras branches of the Brazilian imperial family, and the dispute over the defunct Two Sicilies throne between Prince Pedro, Duke of Calabria and Prince Carlo, Duke of Castro.

However, which additional cases of this are there either right now or likely to be in the near future? Futurist110 (talk) 00:55, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The claims to the Kingdom of Jerusalem form a very tangled skein. --Antiquary (talk) 10:56, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And the Russian throne has three claimants. --Antiquary (talk) 11:18, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Very interesting for both Jerusalem and Russia! Futurist110 (talk) 00:17, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Georgian throne is also an interesting case, as the two competing branches currently have a potential mutual heir. 58.7.142.132 (talk) 11:27, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting stuff! Futurist110 (talk) 00:17, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The former Korean throne is claimed by multiple cadet branches of the house of Yi/Joseon dynasty Red Panda 25 19:44, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting! Futurist110 (talk) 00:21, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Variant flag of Belarus question

Got an interesting one here – I'm working on the Flag of Belarus as a part of going through early Wikipedia:Unreviewed featured articles/2020. I'm trying to figure out which Vexillological symbol in Template:FIAV would be most appropriate for the Variant flag of Belarus (the second one in the infobox). Any suggestions would be appreciated here... Aza24 (talk) 21:03, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Commons has it tagged as historical, but perhaps the “not authorized to represent the group or country” would fit better given the article says “After 1995 the white-red-white flag has been used as a symbol of the opposition… most notably during protests after the 2006, 2010, 2015, and the 2020 presidential elections …. The flag is not officially banned from public usage, but is treated by the authorities as an unregistered symbol which means that demonstration of it ...can lead to arrests and confiscation[26][27]” I can’t read either source, but at least it is a sourced statement! 70.67.193.176 (talk) 21:00, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And When You've Paid the Bill, You're None the Wiser

There's an episode of Public Eye called "And When You've Paid the Bill, You're None the Wiser ". The title seems strangely familiar, but I know I've never seen the programme before. Is it a line from a song or poem perhaps? Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 22:24, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not a song or poem to my knowledge, but the sentence "That wealthy Miss Elbert will pay the bill and be none the wiser" appears on page 193 of volume 9 (March 1928) of Country Teacher by H H Bailey. 81.134.176.48 (talk) 16:50, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]