Talk:Bertrand of Orléans-Braganza

Untitled

Brazil, one imagines. Absolutely brain-softening. --Wetman 04:59, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

"Being a Traditionalist Catholic and a member of Tradition, Family and Property, Prince Bertrand is not married and has no issue, so his dynastic heir is his younger brother, Prince Antonio of Orléans-Braganza, who is married to a Belgian princess, Princess Cristina of Ligne, with issue."

Sorry, I don't seem to have my log-in name ready right now, but I wanted to address an issue on this page. I know for certain that there is no prohibition on Traditionalist Catholics marrying, and I don't believe that TFP members take any kind of vow of celibacy, so if Prince Bertrand is unmarried I don't believe that this is directly caused by his traditionalism or his TFP membership. —Preceding unsigned comment added by D.E. Aurelius (talk) 23:18, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

206.78.191.99 (talk) 23:14, 31 March 2011 (UTC) 

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Prince Bertrand of Orléans-Braganza. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120401234547/http://weber.ucsd.edu/~sbailey/BrazPleb.html to http://weber.ucsd.edu/~sbailey/BrazPleb.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121128214747/http://www.psicoseambientalista.com.br/ to http://www.psicoseambientalista.com.br/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130223040854/http://www.monarquia.org.br/A/AFamiliaimperial/BiografiadBertrand.html to http://www.monarquia.org.br/A/AFamiliaimperial/BiografiadBertrand.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:35, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Not a prince

Please @DWC LR:, provide a source to use Prince in title. I reverted you and, by history, @Sturm and Awikimate: are against your move too. Next time you will be reported to WP:ANI. Ixocactus (talk) 10:35, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Many respected reference works attribute a royal title for example Burke's Royal Families of the World: Europe and Latin America v. 1, Almanach de Gotha’s etc. [1] calls him Prince imperial of Brazil. Also Prince of Orleans- Braganza is a French title so what does the legal view of Brazil matter.-dwc lr (talk) 14:19, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Gotha is not a RS, and Bertrand is not cited by it. Brazil is a republic since 1889 and do not recognize this and other "princes". You was reported to WP:ANI. Ixocactus (talk) 21:04, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Gotha is a reliable source as are the others. Sources disagree that these people are not princes. Russia says Crimea is part of Russia which de facto it is, Wikipedia just have to go along with that? Hungary says you can’t change your birth gender, Wikipedia have to label those people by birth gender as is the legal case? - dwc lr (talk) 09:39, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Oh god there was yet another one. Let me be explicitly clear: this kind of edgelord analogy is grossly inappropriate trolling, and if I see it again you can be sure that you will find yourself the subject of an ANI thread about it. --JBL (talk) 03:48, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 28 February 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 11:34, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

---

Prince Bertrand of Orléans-Braganza → Bertrand of Orléans-Braganza – There is dispute over whether "Prince" should be part of the title and a move war over this. I have no personal opinion on this, but am reverting the latest move back to the stable page name and creating this RM as the proper course of action for concerned parties to discuss. Spike 'em (talk) 09:40, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Oppose thank you Spike 'em for your sensible neutral intervention here. Same logic as at Talk:Princess Maria Francisca of Orléans-Braganza#Requested move 18 February 2022, also WP:NCNT and for consistency across the articles on the Orleans-Braganza’s, Burkes Peerage calls him Prince as does the French reference works Le Petit Gotha. The Almanach de Gotha 1944 calls him Prince on p34 , the 2013 calls him Prince Imperial of Brazil. Then there are news outlets [2], [3]. The irony is this article doesn’t even use a Brazilian title, for example Prince Imperial of Brazil or Prince of Brazil, but instead Prince of Orleans-Braganza which has only existed since 1909 by recognition of the French pretender the Duke of Orleans. Prince has been in the title since day 1 in 2005 and stable Bar a short period following an undiscussed move. dwc lr (talk) 10:20, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Support No one born in 1941 is a prince of an empire than ended in 1889, nor a prince of Orleans, etc., obviously, because there is no kingdom for him to be a prince of. The fact that people pretend to be princes is sort of tediously predictable, as is the fact that people obsessed with tracing the lineages of former monarchies take those pretenses seriously, as is the fact that various news sources incidentally use the titles people falsely claim. Luckily objective reality is sufficiently clear that it shouldn't even be necessary to point out the farcically poor quality of the sources dwc lr has chosen to present. --JBL (talk) 16:08, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Is the BBC a garbage source? They call also him Prince Imperial of Brazil! This is a BLP yet you’ve not cited a single source here. The fact the monarchy is abolished is irrelevant no one is pretending Brazil is a monarchy but it is a long established tradition that royal status is widely recognised regardless as sources support in this case. Swedish royals used to only be able to marry princes/princesses to keep their titles, the current kings father married the ”legally” German commoner Miss Prinzessin von Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha, yet when a couple of his brothers married commoners (Miss Erica Maria Patzek and Miss Kerstin Wijkmark) they had to give up their rights. Funny reality that - dwc lr (talk) 17:06, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Listen, I understand, some people like furries or BDSM, your kink is with the idea that there are lots of nobility running around just waiting to be restored to their rightful place or whatever; on a personal level, more power to you. But please, do it at fandom.com and stop polluting Wikipedia with this garbage. --JBL (talk) 22:46, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

My likes/dislikes are irrelevant I like Reliable Sources, but apparently the BBC is garbage then we better get them deprecated :O. You want to bring your own narrow world view into this, as your argument is basically / Brazil republic, no title, I think title silly, bad and wrong. Yet you have not even pretended to do a bit of research or to educate yourself. I really hope for the credibility of Wikipedia you don’t contribute To articles with this sort of attitude. - dwc lr (talk) 17:36, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Reading WP:NCNT the relevant section seems to be Do not use hypothetical, dissolved or defunct titles, including pretenders (real or hypothetical), unless this is what the majority of reliable sources use. which turns this into a commonname discussion. Are there any BBC articles about him in English as it is generally English language sources that we should poll for this? Spike 'em (talk) 23:33, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Not him no, another family yes Ths lost prince of Brazil Prince Dom Joao Orleans of Bragança. - dwc lr (talk) 17:36, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

• Support. There are plenty of RS that not only don't play into this monarchist promotionalism, but even explicitly reject it, e.g. La Times/Financial Times:

  Bertrand Maria José Pio Januário Miguel Gabriel Rafael Gonzaga de Orleans e Bragança e Wittelsbach has a regal name but no crown — which is what he craves.
  “A return to monarchic rule is the only way to rule Brazil,” said the man more simply known as Dom Bertrand or, as he may prefer, “Prince Imperial of Brazil,” heir to Brazil’s defunct throne.

  Época Negócios: Heir to the extinct throne, Dom Bertrand de Orleans e Bragança lives in a rented 2-bedroom house. A British newspaper report describes the routine of the self-proclaimed Imperial Prince of Brazil. Metrópoles: Dom Bertrand Orleans and Bragança, theoretically the "Imperial Prince of Brazil"... BBC:

  the monarchist leader Bertrand Maria José Pio Januário Miguel Gabriel Rafael Gonzaga de Orleans e Bragança had scheduled meetings with newly sworn in parliamentarians.
  In the office of federal deputy Carla Zambelli (PSL-SP), Dom Bertrand - as he is called by followers...

  Another FT piece: Dom Bertrand, heir to a defunct throne ... This is not what readers of the FT want to see in an article about the illustrious “Prince Imperial of Brazil” — heir to Brazil’s defunct throne... Folha de S. Paulo: At the age of 78, Dom Bertrand de Orleans e Bragança travels Brazil... R7: The imperial family "has black blood", says "prince" of Brazil. D. Bertrand de Orleans and Bragança leads movement that tries to restore the monarchy. Given he is legally not a prince but seeks to promote himself as such, that we have RS regularly referring to him as simply "Bertrand de Orleans e Bragança", and that multiple RS assert the "prince" title is self-proclaimed and used only by the small percent of Brazilians who are monarchists; and also given the successor to the defunct throne is disputed anyway; the NPOV position is very clearly on the side of moving this article to the proposed name. JoelleJay (talk) 01:18, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for these sources showing the use of a royal/noble title (Dom) which is more prevalent in Portuguese than using the Prince title as well, eg Prince Dom Bertrand. Did you mean to say support because your sources are contradicting you? - dwc lr (talk) 18:13, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

That is not a noble title in Brazil, it is used as an honorific for elders and people of high social status. JoelleJay (talk) 23:51, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

And anyway using an honorific "formerly given to gentlemen of Brazil and Portugal" (per Collins) or "prefixed to the Christian name of a Portuguese or Brazilian man of rank" (MW) is most definitely not indicative of these RS acknowledging he holds the "Prince Imperial" title, especially when they put that title in scare quotes and explicitly call it "self-proclaimed". JoelleJay (talk) 00:15, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Why is the president of Brazil never called ‘Dom’ for example, why is it only royals or nobles? Are they the only people of “high status” and perhaps clergy. Why does your source say it’s former when it’s very present. Is he royal or is he not, if not what is his “high status” derived from or is it because he is an old bloke? Why is he called Dom by your sources or by the Brazilian government sources if it not longer exists (like Prince apparently), we are not even discussing putting Prince Imperial in the title just retaining its current title. But why do these government sources call him Dom and Prince Imperial of Brazil or S.A.I.R Dom (His Imperial & Royal Highness). With respect your view and the view of others here, while your welcome to a personal view no matter how obscure, fringe and minority a view it is which even the Brazilian government don’t care about, should have no business determining article names where we are interested in what sources say. At least Wikipedia used to be about that. - dwc lr (talk) 08:40, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Neither of the sources you link calls him a prince...? Every time he is mentioned in the first he is called "Bertrand de Orléans e Bragança". He is only called "Dom" in the second, and a Brazilian ministry hosting a flyer for + audio links of a conference presented by him is hardly the government conferring legitimacy to a title. And who cares what gives someone the "high status" implied by "Dom"? No one is proposing that as the page move target, it has zero bearing on this discussion. The sources do not support widespread and majority use of the title, the title itself hasn't legally been held in 200+ years, only a small minority of Brazilians even support a monarchy now, we have RS stating the title is "self-proclaimed" and that it is tied directly to political groups...there's really no NPOV reason Wikipedia should assert he is a prince and a lot of reasons why we shouldn't. JoelleJay (talk) 01:05, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Ah I see, the "SAIR" is an acronym. Looking into this more, it's not remotely "the government calling him a prince". The Ministry of Foreign Affairs supports a foundation that records podcasts related to foreign affairs and then hosts those podcasts on a subpage of the governmental domain. The conference released the title of his talk as well as the graphic calling him "SAIR Dom Bertrand", so, no, this in no way legitimizes use of the title (which also isn't even the same as the Wiki article name you are advocating, so is irrelevant anyway). JoelleJay (talk) 01:35, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

• Support. As tempting as it is to simply comment "Prince of what?", I will also mention that including "Prince" goes against WP:TITLESINTITLES. The "Mother Teresa" exception clearly does not apply. There are, I am sure, a significant number of articles in RSs that refer to "Sir Patrick Stewart" or "Dame Judi Dench", but we don't title their articles that way. Egsan Bacon (talk) 02:10, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

  In an attempt to avoid a round of tedious back-and-forth, let me observe that (1) there is a link at the bottom of that section to the (different) guideline specifically about royalty, but (2) this guy isn't royalty. --JBL (talk) 03:45, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

• Not right I’m afraid see Prince George of Cambridge or any royal article. - dwc lr (talk) 08:40, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

• Support. all titles specific to the monarchy of brazil in articles of people born after the end of the monarchy in Brazil should be removed. See, e.g., Prince Luiz of Orléans-Braganza, Prince Pedro Henrique of Orléans-Braganza, Prince Pedro Luiz of Orléans-Braganza, Princess Pia Maria of Orléans-Braganza etc. Pls, can someone edit in order to movie of all applicable cases? Sturm (talk) 03:25, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
  • Again no sources cited. The only sources cited in this whole discussion are ones by me and (ironically) JoelleJay which all support use of a title. I’m not sure how an admin is supposed to move this based on what we have seen so far. I don’t like it is not a valid argument. - dwc lr (talk) 18:28, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

    None of my sources support using the "Prince" title. "Dom" is not a royal title in modern Portuguese, it is an honorific title applied to men of high status. But even if it were specific to royalty, it would still not support the current title (he is being called "Dom", not "Prince") and it would go against the MOS to move the page to "Dom Bertrand". JoelleJay (talk) 00:05, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

• Comment The argument that his title of “prince” should be removed because he was born after the monarchy collapsed should be applied to other members of the family in my opinion because currently the page should not be moved based on WP:TITLECON. However, if this RM results in a move, then pages mentioned by Sturm can be listed and moved in due course as the arguments made here apply to all those individuals and not just Bertrand. I would also like to point out that currently the pages on claimants to various thrones have the titles Prince or Duke attached to their names, even though many of those monarchies collapsed long before they were born. So this whole issue of princes/princesses from collapsed monarchies needs to be reviewed in general as we should perhaps come up with new guidelines for WP:NCROY as there have been incidents of disputes recently on how these pages should be titled. Keivan.f^Talk 16:46, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

• You are right but Unfortunately there is a lot of bigoted and ill informed interventions in these discussions. Even Brazilian governmental sources call him Prince Imperial of Brazil but facts like this have an inconvenient way of getting in the way of peoples rabid and irrational hostility of groups of people sometimes. These narrow minded POV people show themselves for what they are though. If we remove titles which they are commonly known by then we open BLP issues over what someone’s “legal name” is, but not many people are concerned by such things due to their own prejudices. - dwc lr (talk) 18:13, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

• Correct. I have never been a fan of naming articles after subjects' legal names, because frankly there are limited resources that we have access to online with regards to what a person's legal name is. We cannot see their IDs or passports after all; not to mention that legal names can also change through court processes. If the government's website refers to him as "Prince Imperial" then I don't know what we are arguing about here. Because that makes the whole argument that he is not known as a prince inside Brazil void. Keivan.f^Talk 05:04, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Exactly right, we are extremely unlikely to be able to source what the “legal name” is, we have no idea what their passport says, how many countries they are citizens of. With BLPs we need the highest standards yet all I have seen so far is personal points of views not grounded in sources or reality. I would say to people why does this article exist in the first place, why is he notable ultimately it’s because he was born into a prominent position into the deposed Imperial Family of Brazil. - dwc lr (talk) 08:40, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@Keivan.f the government does not call him "Prince Imperial". A subdomain of one foundation managed by one ministry of the government hosts a digital library of podcasts, including one of a conference talk he gave at which his provided presenter name is "SAIR Dom Bertrand"; the "government website" merely states "Listen to the conference by SAIR Dom Bertrand de Orleans and Bragança". His full legal name is available in multiple RS, and the majority of RS use "Bertrand de Orleans e Bragança", which is definitely where our article should reside. JoelleJay (talk) 01:56, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@JoelleJay Fair enough. Though I would have loved to see these RS that establish his legal name (which is irrelevant to be honest, what matters is his common name). But, if the common name in English and Portuguese excludes the title "prince" then we have no choice but to go with what the sources say. Though as I said earlier, I always take WP:TITLECON into consideration when dealing with cases like this, and it is not really helpful that the article on his brother is at Prince Luiz of Orléans-Braganza. It's as if Wikipedia is suggesting that there's a difference in rank between the two brothers, which we all know is not the case. That's what I was trying to point out earlier. Keivan.f^Talk 04:05, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

By strange coincidence this government web page has actually been changed since yesterday. Lmao that is actually hilarious I must say, bravo, if not a little bit sad, whoever facilitated that! Let me a pose a question, people are saying he can’t be a Prince and we can’t call him a Prince because the law of Brazil says so right, despite the fact the majority of sources recognise him as royalty via Prince, Dom, Prince Imperial or all three or a combination of them. Hungary legally doesn’t allow you to change gender so if we have Viktor Orban declaring he is female today what do we do, do we call him a “male” as he is under the law, do we say he is a self styled “female”, do we use male or female categories. In this article we have a person who thinks he’s a Prince is regarded as such by multiple reliable sources so how do we deal with these issues where there is a conflict between the majority of reliable sources saying one thing and the legal reality of a single country. What would you do with the Greeks who are universally known by there royal title even though they may have been born after Greece abolished its monarchy, are we supposed to just invent a name for them they are very clear they do not have a surname. So Keivan I think we will never see consistency across Wikipedia we will have infinite discussions some will go one way others the other and maybe go back and forth, unfortunately some people are so against something to the point of irrational which is a symptom of culture wars, social media which were lacking in the early days of Wikipedia. There is no interest in improving these articles because you can read the contempt some hold them in, in the comments in this discussion it’s purely an ideological anti royalty issue. Someone like Ferdinand Habsburg (racing driver) should absolutely be at that title rather than Archduke Ferdinand of Austria because that is not how he is known nor is it what he is known for. - dwc lr (talk) 09:03, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Again, "Dom" is not a noble title. Being referred to with an honorific, even "Prince Imperial", is not evidence that he is literally recognized as a "prince". That is a legal position, legally abolished 200+ years ago, the only way he could be a prince is if the monarchy was restored. I assumed your stance was based on a COMMONNAME argument, not this ridiculous claim that he is actually titled.

Repeatedly, obsessively making this faulty comparison between recognition of defunct titles and trans rights is offensive and warrants admin attention. That no one has directly rebutted you across the numerous times you've made this argument is not because it's good, it's because no one wants to waste their time arguing against a bigot whose position is so obviously deficient. JoelleJay (talk) 19:39, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Your source says Dom doesn’t exist yet multiple sources including ones you have cited are using it for him, members of his family, why? Is everybody in Brazil a Dom or Dona? They aren’t I have at no point said he is legally recognised as a Prince in Brazil I have said he is regularly referred to as such by the majority of source’s. This article is even at a French title, Prince of Orleans-Braganza is not a Brazilian title like Prince if Brazil, Prince Imperial of Brazil, Prince of Grão-Oara because the majority of sources use the French title combination probably because the Imperial Family is divided between who has the right to the title Prince Imperial. Maybe the comparison offends your sensitivities but it is not offensive in the slightest and equivalent given your position, you are saying he can’t be a Prince because Brazil *legally* apparently says so (I haven’t seen this source though), so by your same logic a Hungarian female who today came out and said they are male yet can’t change gender is still a female because Hungary *legally* say so and that has to be your position otherwise you are a hypocrite. Otherwise what is the difference, we are talking about legal recognition which according to you is the be all and end all, not what someone “self identifies” as. Most people and sources are courteous, polite if someone says they are a Prince or female (but born male) they tend to go along with it even if they actually think it’s nonsense rather than expose class/political/trans bigotry. Bigotry comes in many stripes, I’m not the one arguing laws are the be all and end, so zero bigotry from my end whether to non reigning Brazilian Royalty or trans people. - dwc lr (talk) 09:49, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

• Support As eplained by JBL and Sturm above. Bigotry and ill informed decisions are bad. Ixocactus (talk) 02:14, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Again yet another “I don’t like it” based on a personal viewpoint not grounded in any sources. Why do these Brazilian government sources call him Dom and Prince Imperial of Brazil or S.A.I.R Dom (His Imperial & Royal Highness). I must of missed the change of policy but If personal views, not reliable sources are shaping Wikipedia, god help it as it will give Russia Today a run for its money in pumping out fake news and fringe views. - dwc lr (talk) 08:40, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose. Per DWC LR's arguments above, the reliable sources he has provided and the fact that Wikipedia articles about nobility have generally respected the longstanding international tradition of acknowledging their titles regardless of national laws. 79.144.255.92 (talk) 14:57, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
• Support it's not a real title, Brazil isn't a monarchy—blindlynx 16:30, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
•  Comment: Brazil has more than 5000 municipalities and not all of them have a qualified journalist team. In this context, it's sad to see individuals looking for inaccurate sources just to corroborate their worldview prone to the defense of monarchist ideals. I contacted the city hall of Campinas, who recognized the error in Dom and Prince Imperial of Brazil text and promptly removed any reference to Bertrand de Orléans e Bragança as a "prince", he is not a prince anywhere. See the same link, with updated text, here. Now, he is described only as a descendant of the former Brazilian imperial family. Again, I ask please remove ALL false titles of princes, princesse like this Regards, Sturm (talk) 03:31, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
  • Lol you probably got some poor person fired. You know, the fact is the majority of reliable sources consider this man a Prince regardless of what the legal position is in Brazil (people say he is not a Prince there, I have not seen the source produced as of yet). Wikipedia is not subject to the law of any country or individual view of Wikipedia editors, Wikipedia is built on what reliable sources say. So irrespective of if this article gets moved, which I think is questionable given the weakness in the arguments which are “I Don’t like it” rather than fact or policy based Wikipedia:Article titles and not supported by the majority of sources, in reality Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view will require the fact he is commonly called Prince or simply Dom Bertrand to be presented within the article itself. The fact multiple reliable sources call him Prince etc can be easily verified so this is not going away or being suppressed, it is a long historical precedent and practice that deposed royals are commonly still recognised by their titles so there is no difficultly in meeting the Verifiability policy. In the majority of the cases we only have articles because they are notable for their “royal” status and activities. - dwc lr (talk) 09:36, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
• Support. Reality of the title aside, I find the WP:TITLESINTITLES argument convincing. —David Eppstein (talk) 08:33, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
  • Sorry but you misunderstand this policy, go see any royal article below Emperor/King, Prince George of Cambridge, Princess Irina of Romania, Princess Maria-Olympia of Greece and Denmark, Prince Sverre Magnus of Norway etc - dwc lr (talk) 09:36, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
    • WP:NCROY does not apply because his pretension does not actually make him royalty. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:58, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
      • What about the Greek and Romanian examples I cited, plus countless others, where the subjects are given royal titles? -dwc lr (talk) 22:50, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
        • WP:WAX. Maybe they should be moved too. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:17, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
• Support move based on Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(royalty_and_nobility) which says Do not use hypothetical, dissolved or defunct titles, including pretenders (real or hypothetical), unless this is what the majority of reliable sources use. Whilst there are notable sources that call them a Prince, including Prince in the page title would require the majority of reliable sources but from what I read that is not the case here. Gusfriend (talk) 05:56, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

  Although Brazil is a republic, Brazilian authorities often acknowledge his princely status as a matter of protocol:

  Brazilian National Congress:

  https://www.camara.leg.br/internet/SitaqWeb/TextoHTML.asp?etapa=11&nmComissao=Outros%20Eventos&tpReuniaoEvento=&dtReuniao=25/03/2008&hrInicio=14:00:00&hrFim=19:49:00&origemDiscurso=&nmLocal=Plen%C3%A1rio%20Principal%20-%20CD&nuSessao=ESP002/08&nuQuarto=0&nuOrador=0&nuInsercao=0&dtHorarioQuarto=14:00&sgFaseSessao=&Data=25/03/2008&txApelido=&txFaseSessao=&txTipoSessao=&dtHoraQuarto=14:00&txEtapa=

  São Paulo State Parliament:

  https://www.al.sp.gov.br/repositorio/ementario/anexos/20130826-170507-ID_SESSAO=11016.htm

  https://www.al.sp.gov.br/propositura/?id=1000360802

  Rio de Janeiro State Parliament:

  http://www3.alerj.rj.gov.br/lotus_notes/default.asp?id=9&url=L3NjcHJvMTUxOS5uc2YvMTBkNmQ0NTFiMDBmZDQyYjgzMjU2NmVjMDAxOGQ4MzYvZDE2YmFhYzY4MWY1MmQ3YjgzMjU4Mjk1MDA1MzgyMDk/T3BlbkRvY3VtZW50

  Brazilian Federal Supreme Court:

  http://www.stf.jus.br/portal/cms/verNoticiaDetalhe.asp?idConteudo=70380 187.21.233.242 (talk) 14:23, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

His Imperial & Royal Highness

Prince Imperial of Brazil is a HI&RH title (i.e.: S.A.I.R. in Portuguese). Therefore, Dom Bertrand’s style of pretence ought to be changed from HRH to HI&RH.

Besides that, although Brazil is a republic, Brazilian authorities often acknowledge his princely status as a matter of protocol: Brazilian National Congress: https://www.camara.leg.br/internet/SitaqWeb/TextoHTML.asp?etapa=11&nmComissao=Outros%20Eventos&tpReuniaoEvento=&dtReuniao=25/03/2008&hrInicio=14:00:00&hrFim=19:49:00&origemDiscurso=&nmLocal=Plen%C3%A1rio%20Principal%20-%20CD&nuSessao=ESP002/08&nuQuarto=0&nuOrador=0&nuInsercao=0&dtHorarioQuarto=14:00&sgFaseSessao=&Data=25/03/2008&txApelido=&txFaseSessao=&txTipoSessao=&dtHoraQuarto=14:00&txEtapa= São Paulo State Parliament: https://www.al.sp.gov.br/repositorio/ementario/anexos/20130826-170507-ID_SESSAO=11016.htm https://www.al.sp.gov.br/propositura/?id=1000360802 Rio de Janeiro State Parliament: http://www3.alerj.rj.gov.br/lotus_notes/default.asp?id=9&url=L3NjcHJvMTUxOS5uc2YvMTBkNmQ0NTFiMDBmZDQyYjgzMjU2NmVjMDAxOGQ4MzYvZDE2YmFhYzY4MWY1MmQ3YjgzMjU4Mjk1MDA1MzgyMDk/T3BlbkRvY3VtZW50 Brazilian Federal Supreme Court: http://www.stf.jus.br/portal/cms/verNoticiaDetalhe.asp?idConteudo=70380 2804:14D:7E89:4488:FDF5:E108:883D:9A14 (talk) 01:48, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Some of those sources call him 'His Highness' [without Royal or Imperial]. Burke's says that as a descendant of the comte d'Eu his style is 'Royal Highness', and the 'Imperial' is only used for the head of house and his eldest son. So, there are at least three different styles used, in addition to none at all. That's one of the problems with unregulated made-up titles that people bestow on themselves -- there are no actual rules for them, so they end up being anything one likes. DrKay (talk) 08:04, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

That's easy to explain: Burke's 1977 edition was used here to confirm his style.

However, Bertrand's father, Pedro Henrique, was still alive on 1977. Since Pedro Henrique was styled HI&RH The Head of the Imperial House of Brazil, and his eldest son Luiz was styled HI&RH The Prince Imperial of Brazil, Bertrand was styled HRH only as Prince of Brazil and Prince of Orléans-Braganza. (Under Brazil's Imperial Constitution, only the heir presumptive, styled The Prince Imperial of Brazil, and the heir presumptive's eldest son, styled The Prince of Grão-Pará, are entitled to HIH status, while the remaining members of the Imperial Family use HH only. The current use of HRH by members of the family arises from their status as male-line descendants of the Comte d'Eu. Something similar happened in the Grand Ducal Family of Luxembourg when Grand-Duchess Charlotte married Prince Felix of Bourbon Parma and thus raised their descendants from HGDH to HRH status.)

After Pedro Henrique's death in 1981, Luiz became the claimant to the throne and HI&RH The Head of the Imperial House of Brazil and his younger brother Bertrand became HI&RH The Prince Imperial of Brazil.

There could be a third member of the family entitled to HI&RH status, as the eldest son of the Prince Imperial of Brazil would be styled HI&RH The Prince of Grão-Pará. However, since both Luiz and Bertrand are unmarried and have no children, there is no one claiming to be Prince of Grão-Pará right now.

If one of them passes away, the next Prince Imperial of Brazil would be their brother Antônio, whose son Rafael then would use the Grão-Pará title and style. (At least according to the claims of the Vassouras branch of the family.)

Regarding the use of "Highness" instead of "His Imperial & Royal Highness", such usage was quite common even during the monarchy. Monarchists call him "Your Highness", but most people know him as "Dom Bertrand", as the simple style of "Dom", very rare outside the clergy in Portugal and Brazil, is respectful enough. Brazilians in general are not very fond of excessive formality and I think the Orléans-Braganza are no exception to the rule.

Besides that, the use of "HI&RH The Prince Imperial of Brazil" could be controversial in certain official circles. Besides dynastic disputes in the family, "Prince Imperial of Brazil" sounds in denial of the Republic's legitimacy. When authorities have this concern and they invite members of the two branches of the family, they adopt a style of compromise such as "HRH Prince Bertrand of Orleans-Braganza", which, although dynastic, doesn't imply that Brazil is a monarchy or recognition of anyone's rights to the former Brazilian throne.:: 187.21.233.242 (talk) 02:42, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

That's not what Burke's says. It is talking in the round not about individual people. It says the eldest son of the head of house (whoever the head is) has that style and that other collaterals have the style Highness (if not descended from the comte d'Eu) or Royal Highness (if they are). As the sources are not agreed and the material is dubious, I have removed it. DrKay (talk) 07:34, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

According to article 105 of the Brazilian Imperial Constitution (1824): "The heir presumptive of the Empire will be titled "Prince Imperial" and his elder son "Prince of Grão-Pará", all others will be titled "Princes". The heir presumptive will be styled Imperial Highness and the Prince of Grão-Pará will be styled the same; the remaining Princes will be accorded the style of Highness." [in Portuguese: Art. 105. O Herdeiro presumptivo do Imperio terá o Titulo de "Principe Imperial" e o seu Primogenito o de "Principe do Grão Pará" todos os mais terão o de "Principes". O tratamento do Herdeiro presumptivo será o de "Alteza Imperial" e o mesmo será o do Principe do Grão Pará: os outros Principes terão o Tratamento de Alteza.]

All members of the Orleans-Braganza family bearing the style of Prince are descended from the Comte d'Eu and therefore HRH.

In fact, Burke is not wrong, except for not mentioning the "Prince of Grão-Pará", which is understandable, as no one has used this title since 1920. 177.191.196.249 (talk) 12:15, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Bertrand do Brasil.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:23, 17 July 2022 (UTC)