Habsburgs vs Bourbons

[Lechasseur]

In the 1600s? The Bourbons for sure

But probably starting from Joseph II at the latest (and until the present), I'd probably go with the Habsburgs tbh (at least when comparing to the senior lines of the Bourbons)

[Lechasseur]

I have no love lost for the Bourbons post-Louis XIII, but the Habsburgs were one of the most consistently evil force throughout European history (the Hohenzollerns got even worse once they became prominent, but that happened late enough that they probably still rank behind overall), so it's not a hard choice at all.

And yeah, Southern Italy has a lot of legitimate grievances to voice against their Northern brethren, but neo-Bourbonists are utter clowns.

Eh, I think the Habsburgs are more mixed.

I think the earlier (think pre-Spanish Habsburgs) were pretty good, and then they really mellowed down starting from the mid-late 18th Century to end up becoming one of the best European royal houses imo.

But yeah say from the 16th Century until the 18th Century, they had issues.

That being said, i do kind of have a soft spot for Charles Quint (he may have made poor decisions here and there, but i believe he was a fundamentally good person who tried doing his best, unlike say Henry VIII. He even got tired of being Emperor and abdicated. Plus, he was a family man who absolutely adored his wife, something you didn't see with most European monarchs back in the day).

And when I was talking about the Habsburgs vs the Bourbons in the present day/recent past, Otto von Habsburg>>>>>>Juan Carlos and Prince Alfonso any day.

An EU with a Habsburg Emperor may not be a bad thing actually haha (that is more or less what the Habsburg Empire would look like today if it still existed).

[Lechasseur]

What exactly is a "Neo-Bourbonist"?

[Lechasseur]

I have no love lost for the Bourbons post-Louis XIII, but the Habsburgs were one of the most consistently evil force throughout European history (the Hohenzollerns got even worse once they became prominent, but that happened late enough that they probably still rank behind overall), so it's not a hard choice at all.

And yeah, Southern Italy has a lot of legitimate grievances to voice against their Northern brethren, but neo-Bourbonists are utter clowns.

Do you know who historian Alessandro Barbero is? He once had a debate with some neo-Bourbonist "leaders" and absolutely destroyed them.

I believe I've already read one of his books actually, but on an entirely different subject, the barbarian invasions and conquest of Western Rome

[Lechasseur]

I have no love lost for the Bourbons post-Louis XIII, but the Habsburgs were one of the most consistently evil force throughout European history (the Hohenzollerns got even worse once they became prominent, but that happened late enough that they probably still rank behind overall), so it's not a hard choice at all.

And yeah, Southern Italy has a lot of legitimate grievances to voice against their Northern brethren, but neo-Bourbonists are utter clowns.

Do you know who historian Alessandro Barbero is? He once had a debate with some neo-Bourbonist "leaders" and absolutely destroyed them.

I believe I've already read one of his books actually, but on an entirely different subject, the barbarian invasions and conquest of Western Rome

HOLY MARY. The immensity of Barbero going international. His main subject is actually the Middle Ages, in any case.

Yep I went and checked, it was written by Barbero

I read the French translation of the book

It's "Barbares : immigrés, réfugiés et déportés dans l'empire Romain" by Alessandro Barbero (published by Editions Tallendier, 2011)

Here's the link below

https://www.tallandier.com/livre/barbares/

It was actually a decent book imo

[Lechasseur]

I have no love lost for the Bourbons post-Louis XIII, but the Habsburgs were one of the most consistently evil force throughout European history (the Hohenzollerns got even worse once they became prominent, but that happened late enough that they probably still rank behind overall), so it's not a hard choice at all.

And yeah, Southern Italy has a lot of legitimate grievances to voice against their Northern brethren, but neo-Bourbonists are utter clowns.

Do you know who historian Alessandro Barbero is? He once had a debate with some neo-Bourbonist "leaders" and absolutely destroyed them.

I believe I've already read one of his books actually, but on an entirely different subject, the barbarian invasions and conquest of Western Rome

HOLY MARY. The immensity of Barbero going international. His main subject is actually the Middle Ages, in any case.

Well when you get down to it, someone who's interested in the Middle Ages should probably be interested in the Barbarian Invasions, as they ended Antiquity and began the Middle Ages.

The Kingdoms of Europe within the former Roman Empire, with the obvious exception of Byzantium, were essentially the descendants of those barbarian kingdoms created as the result of the invasions (and the royalty and aristocracy of Europe were essentially descended of those Germanic tribes, even the House of Savoy was descended of a Saxon aristocrat from Magdeburg who migrated down to Savoy in the 10th Century).