Possible Romanian and Bulgarian candidates for king

Could anyone educate me on who the possible candidates for the Romanian and Bulgarian thrones were? I haven't been able to find much information on these topics. Thanks.
 
Bulgaria (1878): Prince Valdemar of Denmark, Prince Henry of Reuss.

Bulgaria (1886):
Prince Niko of Megrelia
Valdemar of Denmark (again)
Prince Nicholas of Montenegro
King Milan of Serbia
King Carol of Romania
Aleko Vogorides, a Phanariote prince of vaguely Bulgarian origins

Romania: they chose Prince Philippe of Belgium, when he refused they basically defaulted to Charles.
 
Bulgaria (1878): Prince Valdemar of Denmark, Prince Henry of Reuss.

Bulgaria (1886):
Prince Niko of Megrelia
Valdemar of Denmark (again)
Prince Nicholas of Montenegro
King Milan of Serbia
King Carol of Romania
Aleko Vogorides, a Phanariote prince of vaguely Bulgarian origins

Romania: they chose Prince Philippe of Belgium, when he refused they basically defaulted to Charles.

Don't forget the Russian candidacy for Prince Oldenburgski to become prince of Bulgaria.

And with Romania, they wanted someone with connexions to Napoléon III IIRC, but I'm guessing that someone like Prince Murat or a Prince of Canino who has zero other royal connections would be unlikely to get a look in. Maybe a Beauharnais princeling? (I once saw a TL with a Wittelsbach Romania, so Beauharnais might no be impossible; another had Prince Borghese (son of Camillo and Pauline Bonaparte) end up as ruler of Wallachia).
 
Don't forget the Russian candidacy for Prince Oldenburgski to become prince of Bulgaria.

AFAIK, the Russian candidacy was for Prince Nicholas of Megrelia. Russia did contemplate Oldenburgski, but ultimately did not nominate him as its candidate.
Admittedly, I'm more interested in the possibility of Niko's ascension either way. The old royalty of the Caucasus doesn't get much attention.
And with Romania, they wanted someone with connexions to Napoléon III IIRC, but I'm guessing that someone like Prince Murat or a Prince of Canino who has zero other royal connections would be unlikely to get a look in. Maybe a Beauharnais princeling? (I once saw a TL with a Wittelsbach Romania, so Beauharnais might no be impossible; another had Prince Borghese (son of Camillo and Pauline Bonaparte) end up as ruler of Wallachia).

What were relations like between Napoleon III and the Russian (Leuchtenberg) branch of the Beauharnais? Because relations between the Second French Empire and Russia were far from great, so I don't know if Paris would approve.
 
AFAIK, the Russian candidacy was for Prince Nicholas of Megrelia. Russia did contemplate Oldenburgski, but ultimately did not nominate him as its candidate.
Admittedly, I'm more interested in the possibility of Niko's ascension either way. The old royalty of the Caucasus doesn't get much attention.
You are quite right. At the time, Zahari Stoyanov, noted Bulgarian writer and revolutionary as well as a high ranking member of the Bulgarian government called the proposal to appoint, in his words, a "perverted Circassian", humiliation and mockery. And I think that the general opinion wasn't much better.
 
About Romania they asked Phillip of Belgium who refused,then asked Leopold von Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen who also refused and the his younger brother Karl who accepted and became Carol i.He died whithout a heir so the throne went to Leopold's son Ferdinand in 1916.
What's the link to Wittelsbach Romania?
 
Bulgaria (1878): Prince Valdemar of Denmark, Prince Henry of Reuss.

Bulgaria (1886):
Prince Niko of Megrelia
Valdemar of Denmark (again)
Prince Nicholas of Montenegro
King Milan of Serbia
King Carol of Romania
Aleko Vogorides, a Phanariote prince of vaguely Bulgarian origins

Romania: they chose Prince Philippe of Belgium, when he refused they basically defaulted to Charles.
If you don't mind, what are your sources for finding this information. And do you know how strongly they considered these candidates before choosing? Thanks.
 
You are quite right. At the time, Zahari Stoyanov, noted Bulgarian writer and revolutionary as well as a high ranking member of the Bulgarian government called the proposal to appoint, in his words, a "perverted Circassian", humiliation and mockery.

A hilariously twisted assessment, since Nicholas Dadiani was
1) Not a Circassian (perverted or otherwise), and
2) A decorated war hero of the liberation of Bulgaria, who fought at Tarnovo, Kazanlak and Shipka Pass.

As for general opinion, I couldn't say...but I imagine the general opinion was at least somewhat better than Stoyanov's. After all, the people who invited Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha ( Stambolov and his anti-Russian government) were famous for their constant use of large-scale election fraud. IIRC, some credit Stambolov for pretty much singlehandedly inventing large-scale election fraud in Bulgaria. The fact that they had to resort to such methods leads me to believe that public opinion of Russia was still fairly positive. In spite of Russia's mistakes throughout the 1880s.
 
If you don't mind, what are your sources for finding this information. And do you know how strongly they considered these candidates before choosing? Thanks.

I don't remember tbh, it was several different articles and sources. As for the candidates' prospects, I'd only say that Carol didn't have much of a chance, and Milan had no chance at all.
 
The Bulgarian Sakskoburgotski descend from medieval Bulgarian monarchs. Maybe there is some prince with Basarab ancestry for Romania?
 
A hilariously twisted assessment, since Nicholas Dadiani was
1) Not a Circassian (perverted or otherwise), and
2) A decorated war hero of the liberation of Bulgaria, who fought at Tarnovo, Kazanlak and Shipka Pass.
I imagine that many people in Bulgaria did not distinguish the various ethnicities in the Caucasus and they all had a bad reputation due to the Circassians, the only ones present in any significant number in Bulgaria. More importantly, he also gave up his own principality to the Russian Empire for what basically amounted to a bribe (the title of prince, a million roubles and a major's commission), which might explain Stoyanov's scorn.


As for general opinion, I couldn't say...but I imagine the general opinion was at least somewhat better than Stoyanov's. After all, the people who invited Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha ( Stambolov and his anti-Russian government) were famous for their constant use of large-scale election fraud. IIRC, some credit Stambolov for pretty much singlehandedly inventing large-scale election fraud in Bulgaria. The fact that they had to resort to such methods leads me to believe that public opinion of Russia was still fairly positive. In spite of Russia's mistakes throughout the 1880s.
It's an exaggeration to say that Stambolov and his allies were famous for constant election fraud. Not all of the elections held during his time were characterized by fraud, mostly the later ones where his authoritarianism began to become unpopular and he fell out with his former allies. And he certainly wasn't the last Bulgarian politician to engage in fraud. So while opinion of Russia was likely positive, it certainly seems that at least during the first crucial years after prince Alexander's abdication, Stambolov had enough popular support.
 
Last edited:
I don't know that it's fair to accuse Dadiani of "falling" to bribery. It wasn't as if he was going to magically reclaim the principality's freedom. He took the best option for himself and his family in the end rather than fight for something that wasn't going to be won. Niko still did a lot to promote Georgian culture and interests after his mother died, including donating his father's personal library.
 
Top