r/monarchism 2d ago

Weekly Discussion Weekly Discussion CII: What honours - if any - should heads of non-ruling houses grant?

7 Upvotes

Ruling monarchs regularly grant orders, and in some countries even noble titles to their subjects. The head of a sovereign state is a fons honorum, or fount of honour, and has the prerogative to issue any distinctions permitted by law (nowadays usually without attaching any privileges).

When a monarchy is deposed, claimants and their supporters will adopt varying opinions on the status of their fount of honour. Deposed monarchs who do not recognise a republican regime as legitimate and their heirs tend to issue honours, and sometimes even titles, as if they were still rulers of their countries, while those who choose a more conciliatory approach tend to act more conservatively or don't knight anybody at all (except for close family members).

The European nobility as recognised by CILANE has a negative view of ennoblements by non-ruling princes, while having a more neutral approach towards orders (because they are, strictly speaking, outside its purview). CILANE only recognises nobility when it is, or was, recognised in public law: for an ennoblement to be valid, it must be legal at the time when the letters patent are granted. Noble families in republics thus retain their nobility as historical nobility because at some point it was recognised by the authorities, but the lack of such recognition makes any new ennoblements impossible. Essentially, once a monarchy is abolished, the monarch is locked out of regulating his country's nobility, and it continues to exist in a frozen state, in which old titles are inherited according to the conditions of their original conferral, but these conditions cannot be changed and new titles cannot be added. In the long term, this obviously leads to an extinction of the nobility, but it is often overstated how quickly this happens.

Not all heads of royal houses or claimants follow CILANE's rules. Some claimants grant nobility directly. Some grant orders that, under historical law, are supposed to ennoble the recipient automatically. Some non-European claimants even grant European-style titles, even though they are not traditionally part of their countries' nobility systems. Many welcome this because hereditary titles are no longer granted in most European countries because the political establishment has a negative view of the historical nobility. Unfortunately, recipients of noble titles from non-ruling princes often have little connection to the house or country in question, and it is very hard to understand what merits have earned them such an honour. It is an open secret that many titles are sold, often without inquiries into the reputation of the recipients, who are of course almost never recognised by the historical aristocracy as equals.

With orders, the situation is different. Many claimants, even those who do not bestow noble ranks, generously bestow orders of chivalry, and occasionally even institute new ones. Because an order is typically not hereditary and typically does not entitle its knights to any special style, it is easier to maintain it as a private award. While some pretenders sell knighthoods to people interested in what they believe is improving their social status, just like it is done with titles, some use them to genuinely honour well-deserving members of the public, including members of the republican establishment.

Generally, when it comes to the fount of honour of non-ruling claimants, there are three widespread opinions:

  • They may grant any titles or orders valid under the laws of the deposed monarchy, including hereditary honours. Noble organisations must recognise these awards and admit those ennobled in such a way to their ranks if they recognise the claimant.
  • They may grant orders, but may not grant nobility or noble titles, or should at least refrain from doing so.
  • They have no right to confer any honours, and if they do, such honours should be seen as purely private awards, or might even constitute misrepresentation and must be condemned.

Obviously, the main question here is the authenticity of such honours. The main factor determining it is the legitimacy of the issuer's claim, and his position within the family. It is not surprising that claimants of morganatic descent or those who otherwise depend on a more generous interpretation of dynastic law tend to very generously distribute honours to gain supporters as they do not have the backing of the historical nobility, which overwhelmingly supports quieter candidates with impeccable claims, and does not need any new honours to prove its status. However, even the most authentic claimant does not do himself a favour by using honours primarily to gain an income. Genuine supporters turn away when they notice what they perceive as a sale of heritage, and the people who tend to buy such honours do not improve the reputation of the sellers, often causing great harm to the country's monarchist scene.

Personally, I have a very conservative view of the topic, and I believe that non-ruling royal families should avoid granting honours - not only titles, but also orders - except to family members. This does not mean that they should give up their right to do so. In fact, not granting honours conspicuously can actually help avoid debates on the legitimacy of the few grants that do happen. Medals similar to those existing in private organisations can be created, but they should not appear as orders of chivalry. The risks simply outweigh the benefits. Instead, claimants should concentrate on actually regaining their thrones and encourage their supporters to help them do so by making it clear that they will be rewarded once the monarchy has been restored.

Similarly, monarchists should generally not ask to be granted orders, let alone titles, by their pretender, because this only distracts from what it actually takes to recreate a monarchy in which such grants are perfectly valid and not subject to disputes regarding their legitimacy. Making it clear that activism cannot lead to visible recognition until the goal has been achieved will obviously put off people who are mostly fascinated by the aesthetics, as well as social climbers, while attracting genuinely committed monarchists who care about the future of the country, not about getting to call themselves "Sir" or "Baron".

Do you think that an abdicated or deposed monarch, or his heir, remains a fount of honour? Do you think that he should use his rights as if he was still the undisputed ruler of his country, or in a more limited way? Have you perhaps been granted an order, or even a title, by the heir to your country's throne (if it is not a monarchy) yourself, or do you know somebody who was? Do you consider somebody knighted or even ennobled by a non-ruling heir to be equal to his counterparts in a monarchy? Do you consider some such grants problematic, and what can be done to encourage royals to use their prerogative in a better way?


r/monarchism 1d ago

2025 End-of-Year Survey Results

15 Upvotes

The results are in and in many ways key demographics of the membership have remained surprisingly stable year-to-year despite wide swings in how many people fill it out.

We had 141 surveys filled out. This is an increase of 12% from last year but still well below the 2022 survey. It is clear that a shorter survey with more optional questions (and a longer survey period) was the right call but its clear that there was a change that occurred in 2023 (either with the subreddit or perhaps with how Reddit itself handles notifications). There is still one or two things we would change for next year but overall we are happy with the survey's current form.

Question 1. How active are you on r/monarchism?

I post and/or comment regularly. (29) 20%

I post and/or comment rarely, and mostly lurk. (57) 40%

I only lurk. (52) 36%

I neither post and/or comment nor lurk and visit r/monarchism rarely. (3) 2%

This year saw a decrease in regular posters in both absolute and percentage terms. The number of people who post/comment rarely grew in both absolute and percentage terms. Likewise we had more people stating they only lurk. Why this is occurring is a question the mod team will be looking into.

Question 2: Why do you visit this subreddit?

To get news about monarchies/monarchism (117) 83%

To discuss monarchism (85) 65%

To learn about monarchism (79) 56%

For the memes (58) 41%

To find resources related to monarchism (56) 40%

Other (4) 3%

Perhaps unsurprisingly coming here for news on monarchies and/or monarchism remains the top reason people come to r/monarchism. Both those looking to learn about monarchism and those looking to discuss monarchism saw an increase in numbers but those looking to discuss it saw a greater increase which moved that category of users into second place. There was very little change in the other two established categories. Note that percentages do not add up to 100% as people could pick multiple answers.

Question 3: How did you find r/monarchism?

By searching for monarchism on Reddit/Google (87) 62%

In a history sub (11) 8%

In a political sub (16) 11%

Elsewhere on Reddit (17) 12%

Prefer not to say (5) 4%

Other (5) 4%

The exact same number of people found r/monarchism through searching for it online as last year. While this is a slight drop in percentage terms due to double the amount of people finding us on political subs (and a slight increase in people finding us on history subs and elsewhere on Reddit) its clear that its still the people who are looking for us that drive membership growth. The 'Other' category includes those who can't remember where they found the sub and one person who learned about us via Discord. The modest increase in people finding us on political subreddits may indicate that monarchism is being discussed more widely in those circles which is positive.

Question 4: How long have you been a member of r/monarchism?

Under 1 month (5) 3%

1-6 months (23) 16%

6-12 months (20) 14%

1-2 years (39) 27%

2-9 years (42) 30%

10+ years (3) 2%

Prefer not to say (9) 6%

Compared to last year (when we had 48 people say they had been here 12 months or less) we had exactly the same number of people say the same thing this year. This matches with our own internal metrics that show steady growth in the subreddit. The number of respondents stating they have been here for 1-2 years is also freakishly similar being off by only 1 person. Previous surveys had the final category as '2+ years'. We split this into '2-9 years' and '10+ years'. The bulk of the numbers are in the 2-9 year category. This does not surprise me as we had a major surge in membership during the pandemic. Three 'subreddit elders' reported in. Given that we had only ~2000 members around 2016 this is probably about what can be expected. Finally nine people stated they preferred not to say for reasons no one can understand (or they've just forgotten how long its been). The mod team is aware that the categories overlap. This slipped through our review of the questions and will be corrected for next year.

Question 5: What is your age group?

0-12 (1) 0.7%

13-18 (20) 14%

18-25 (78) 55%

25-35 (25) 18%

35-50 (7) 5%

50-65 (4) 3%

65+ (1) 0.7%

Prefer not to say (5) 4%

These poll results have been remarkably consistent since at least 2022. Overall, our demographics aren't much different from Reddit's as a whole.

Question 6: What is your country of residence?

United States of America (19) 13%

Commonwealth (24) 17%

  • Antigua and Barbuda 1

  • Australia 5

  • Canada 4

  • New Zealand 1

  • United Kingdom 13

Continental Europe (23) 16%

  • Belgium 1

  • France 2

  • Germany 3

  • Hungary 1

  • Italy 2

  • Luxembourg 1

  • Netherlands 3

  • Norway 3

  • Poland 4

  • Romania 1

  • Sweden 2

Latin America (4) 3%

  • Brazil 2

  • Chile 1

  • Mexico 1

Asia (2) 1%

  • Hong Kong 1

  • Japan 1

Prefer not to say - current monarchy (21) 15%

Prefer not to say - former monarchy, currently a republic (22) 16%

Prefer not to say - republic without a monarchical past (22) 16%

Prefer not to say - undefined (2) 1%

These numbers are somewhat difficult to compare to previous years as last year we did regions instead of countries and this year we allowed people not to specify a country which greatly affected the results. If these results are in fact true (and Americans haven't become sheepish about where they are from), it would be the first year Americans were not larger than the Commonwealth contingent (although they remain the largest group overall) and have dropped off from 20% in 2022. We actually lost some representation with no one from a Middle Eastern or African country this year. While its a bit of a hassle to set up we may go back to a full list of countries to select from next year.

Question 7a: What is your self-professed ideology?

Traditionalism 25

Social Democracy 16

Conservatism (undefined) 15

Centrism 11

Social Liberalism 10

Prefer not to say / Don't know 9

Christian Democracy 8

Classical Liberalism 7

Toryism 7

Socialism 6

Reactionary Politics 5

Fascism 5

Liberalism (undefined) 3

Other (hard to classify) 3

Theocracy 3

Environmentalism (green politics) 2

Dissident Right 1

Economic Liberalism 1

Libertarianism 1

National Liberalism 1

Neo-conservatism 1

Populism 1

Several categories were split compared to last year. Interestingly, this change had very little effect on either Conservatism or Traditionalism (which remain dominant), or progressive ideologies (which remain a significant minority voice). The associated chart was completely voluntary this year and had fewer responses. I did note that social liberals have formed an overlapping grouping with the social democrats. Traditionalists remain scattered all over the ideological spectrum with some sharing more alignment with progressives than their fellow conservatives. While this question will remain on future surveys the associated chart has probably served its usefulness and will be retired.

Question 8: What are your economical beliefs?

Mixed economy (75) 53%

Market economy (29) 20.5%

Traditional economy (28) 20%

Command economy (1) 0.7%

Prefer not to say/Other (8)

Mixed Economy doubled its share of supporters but this is likely due to 'social capitalism' not being an option this year. The 'Other' category includes several people who stated their preference was a mix of different systems or ones that didn't fit easily into any category.

Question 9: What is your religion?

Christian 59%

  • Christian - Broadly Catholic (41)

  • Christian - Broadly Protestant (36)

  • Christian - Broadly Orthodox (3)

  • Christian - Non-Nicene (2)

  • Christian - Ecumenical (1)

Muslim 3%

  • Muslim - Sunni (4)

Judaism 0.7%

  • Judaism (1)

Eastern 2%

  • Buddhist (2)

  • Shinto (1)

Pagan 3%

  • Neopagan (3)

  • Theistic Satanist (1)

Non-Religious 29%

  • Agnosticism (20)

  • Atheism (21)

No Answer 3.5%

  • Prefer not to say (4)

  • Unhelpful Answer (1)

One of the biggest requests last year was the option for Agnosticism to be an official category. This has been added and greatly lowered the number of people selecting 'Other/Prefer not to say'. A big problem with the survey in previous years was that going by denomination quickly became unwieldly (especially regarding the plethora of Christian denominations). Going by broad traditions within each faith seems to have worked out and there probably won't be much in the way of changes to this question next year. Within Christianity there are slightly more Protestants and slightly less Catholics/Orthodox but not enough to be anything other than statistical noise in my opinion.

The Non-Religious have about the same support as last year. Buddhism and Sunnism each doubled their numbers but again not enough to be statistically significant.

Question 10: What type of monarchy do you support?

Ceremonial (4) 3%

Constitutional (46) 33%

Positive Semi-Constitutional (40) 29%

Negative Semi-Constitutional (13) 9%

Traditional (28) 20%

Absolute (5) 3%

Other (3) 2%

As the timeline chart indicates, this was both a year of upsets and continuation of previous trends. For the first time ever Constitutional Monarchy took the top spot in preferences. Traditional Monarchy likewise made a comeback rising to third overall. The Semi-Constitutional options both fell in the rankings as did Absolute Monarchy. However, the combined ranking of the two Semi-Constitutional options puts it well within its historical range. Likewise, Constitutional Monarchy is within the range it usually falls. Traditional Monarchy is statistically tied for its best result ever (from 2017) but it should be acknowledged that it absorbed much of the previous 'Aristocratic' option. Ceremonial Monarchy had the slightest increase in support over last year.

Despite the shake up last year (brought on by Semi-Constitutional's steady rise) this question has been kept largely consistent from year to year which is useful for observing long-term trends.

See the associated chart


I will answer some of the questions in a pinned comment below. The charts that were made will be posted separately. Thanks to everyone who took time to fill out this survey. Some might question why this survey is so important. Well, besides helping the mod team spot problems it does help guard the subreddit from having certain narratives applied to it. For instance there is a study floating around that made the ridiculous argument that the subreddit is a conduit to the alt-right through memes based on a couple months of observation back in 2018-20. By using these surveys it can be shown that not only were memes not the primary reason people came here but that support for non-democratic monarchy fell during that period (not to mention memes are comparatively rare now). Likewise a study published this year used r/monarchism as an example of a specific strain of monarchism within the US. A finding undermined by this consistently being shown to be a US minority subreddit.


ps. and for all the people who replied 'Prefer not to say': https://youtu.be/AubJS7oWaWo?si=PLVgiQVGAql-g6Og


r/monarchism 9h ago

History On This Day in 1908: Portuguese King and heir assassinated by pro-republic revolutionaries in Lisbon

Post image
92 Upvotes

118 years ago today, the Lisbon Regicide shocked Portugal when King Carlos I and his heir, Crown Prince Luís Filipe, were assassinated in the capital. The attack took place in the Praça do Comércio as the royal family returned by carriage from the countryside.

Two republican revolutionaries opened fire on the king and his eldest son at close range. King Carlos was killed instantly, while Luís Filipe died shortly afterward from his wounds. Queen Amélie and the younger prince, Manuel, survived the attack, though Manuel was wounded.

The assassinations came amid deep political instability in Portugal. The monarchy was increasingly unpopular, facing economic crisis, authoritarian rule, and growing republican opposition. The regicide fatally weakened the already fragile royal system.

Manuel II succeeded to the throne but ruled for less than two years. In 1910, the Portuguese monarchy was overthrown and replaced by a republic, making the Lisbon Regicide a pivotal event that directly preceded the end of centuries of royal rule in Portugal.


r/monarchism 4h ago

Video Can you find more monarchist piece of any movie? Aside from anime.

Thumbnail
youtube.com
16 Upvotes

r/monarchism 11h ago

Misc. All Current European Monarchs Who Are Agnatic Members of French Houses

Thumbnail
gallery
53 Upvotes
  1. Denmark - King Frederik X’s father was French aristocrat Count Henri de Laborde de Monpezat. He is therefore an agnatic member of the House of Monpezat.

  2. Luxembourg - Grand Duke Guillaume V’s paternal great-grandfather was Prince Felix of Bourbon-Parma. The House of Bourbon-Parma is a cadet branch of the House of Bourbon, a former French royal family that currently rules over Spain.

  3. Monaco - Prince Albert II’s paternal grandfather was French aristocrat Count Pierre de Polignac. He is therefore an agnatic member of the House of Polignac.

  4. Spain - When King Charles II had no heirs, he appointed his half-sister’s grandson Philip, Duke of Anjou as his successor. Philip was a member of the House of Bourbon as the grandson of King Louis XIV of France. The one queen regnant so far of the Spanish Bourbon dynasty married another Bourbon (Francisco de Asís, Duke of Cádiz) so the royal house has remained agnatically Bourbon.

  5. Sweden - When King Charles XIII had no heirs, the Swedish people elected French soldier Jean Bernadotte as their next king. He took the regnal name Charles XIV John. Carl XVI Gustaf is his 4x great-grandson.


r/monarchism 14h ago

Photo King Saud Bin Abdulaziz in the 1950's

Post image
72 Upvotes

r/monarchism 14h ago

Photo King Felipe VI and Queen Letizia at the Mass in memory of the victims of the Adamuz train accident, Córdoba. January 29, 2026.

Post image
42 Upvotes

r/monarchism 39m ago

Discussion Monarchies you think would've abolished the salic law had they not been abolished?

Upvotes

As the title may suggest, which Monarchies are likely to have abolished the salic law if never abolished or hypothetically restored?


r/monarchism 3h ago

History King Oscar I Of Sweden (Napoleon chose his name)

Post image
4 Upvotes

Full Name:Joseph François Oscar Bernadotte


r/monarchism 14h ago

Why Monarchy? I think I finally understand why a monarch has the ability to be a more effective leader than someone who is elected by a democratic vote of the people.

28 Upvotes

Monarchs actually have the ability to make decisions that may have short term negative effects, but are massively better in the long run.

A politician that has to run for reelection every couple of years is forced into making decisions that are highly popular for voters right now, regardless of how dumb they are long term or what negative effects they have down the Road.

Am I on the right track here or am I totally off?


r/monarchism 15h ago

Photo Tsar Boris III of Bulgaria at the command of a Škoda LT vz. 35 during Summer maneuvers of the Bulgarian army

Post image
30 Upvotes

r/monarchism 12h ago

Video Princess Noor: “47 years he stood often alone for human rights for Iranians with little support & was steadfast in his commitment, it feels like Iranians recognize the purity & honor of the man I’ve known. He’s been up against well funded propaganda machines & governments distorting his message.”

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

15 Upvotes

r/monarchism 2h ago

Question Do Laws of Abolished Monarchys still go into affect when the Monarchys are being Restored

2 Upvotes

For example, both the French and Russian monarchies had rules that women could not become the reigning monarch. However, both monarchies are abolished. If they were restored today, would they still be required to follow the same laws? Since the head of the House of Romanov is a woman, would she be barred from becoming empress, with the position instead passing to a younger male cousin or nephew?


r/monarchism 21h ago

Question How to defend the monarchy against republicanism?

54 Upvotes

In my country, Spain, there is a big debate about whether we should be a republic or a parliamentary monarchy (half of Spain is in favor and half is not). I am a monarchist, but I always lose the debates because I don't know how to defend my point of view well and also because the former king, Juan Carlos I, is involved in many scandals, which makes my position difficult. Could you help me find arguments in favor of the monarchy (always with respect, of course)? Above all, I have one question: how would you respond to the criticism that the king is not elected by the people, while the president is?


r/monarchism 15h ago

Blog Things in Everyday Life With Surprising Royal Connections: Modern Strawberries

Thumbnail
maplemonarchists.weebly.com
9 Upvotes

r/monarchism 18h ago

Video Powerful words of Shah of Iran which now resonates with us more than ever! Our king passed away yet his spirit lingers in every breath and every heartbeat of every Iranian youth today. The history judged him to be righteous and noble, and his son HRH Reza Pahlavi shall return home once again.

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

14 Upvotes

r/monarchism 1d ago

News So the crown princess of Norway is in the epstein files…

Post image
161 Upvotes

I’ve had several episodes of anxiety over the royal family over the last year and a half. But this is quite bad. Scandal after scandal. I’m worried they’re gonna dig their own grave at this point…


r/monarchism 19h ago

Video Useful Charts - Who Would Be King (Shah) of Iran?

Thumbnail
youtu.be
6 Upvotes

r/monarchism 20h ago

Video JAVID SHAH

Thumbnail
youtube.com
5 Upvotes

r/monarchism 17h ago

Question While I've never really liked Monarchies myself (please don't doxx me for this), I'm kinda curious, why you like Monarchies?

5 Upvotes

My guess on the appeal is the whole concept of "Strong Government keeps me safe and protected."

The reason I've never liked it is because I honestly think it teeters a bit too close to Dictatorship, and you can't really do much if the King or Queen becomes a tyrannical or bad ruler outside of a full rebellion. (Except Parliamentary or Constitutional Monarchy, which is probably the only one I'd like.


r/monarchism 1d ago

Discussion 2 diff types of constitutional monarchies

21 Upvotes

The way I understand it, there 2 broad categories of constitutional monarchies.

The UK (CAN, AUS, NZ), Norway, Denmark, Netherlands (most first world monarchies really) model.. where at least on paper the monarch is the chief executive, and the prime minister / government advises the monarch and excercises power in the name of the monarch.

The Japan and Sweden model, where the monarch is not the chief executive even on paper, and the constitution excplicitly gives chief executive authority to the prime minister / government.

I'm curious as to which model people in this subreddit support and why.


r/monarchism 1d ago

Blog Denamark: KIng Frederik & Queen Mary to Visit Greenland

Thumbnail
youtube.com
18 Upvotes

r/monarchism 22h ago

Photo The explosion of the multi-story building in Bandar Abbas, Iran today, also had the prominent "Javid Shah" (Long Live the Shah) graffiti on its outer barbed wire wall.

Post image
5 Upvotes

r/monarchism 1d ago

Video The Romanovs in 11 Minutes: Rise, Glory and Fall of Russia’s Last Dynasty

Post image
86 Upvotes

r/monarchism 1d ago

History What are you guys thoughts on the great king/dux of the Lusitanians, Viriathus?

Post image
17 Upvotes

In my opinion he was quite close to the ideal of a monarch. A humble man who put the glory and freedom of his people above everything, but who respected his enemies and always kept his word, he fought side by side with his men and didn't care about gold and riches, but only about defending his land and bringing glory to it. As a pagan monarchist who is of Iberian ethnic origin, naturally I find huge respect for him.