Talk:Ercole III d'Este

Hoax

False allegations are being repeatedly added to this article under the section, Ercole III d'Este, Duke of Modena#Succession to Ercole III. As I noted in the edit summary when this was deleted from the House of Este article, "rv Hoax. Italy is a republic which recognizes no noble titles, thus ultra vires that 'In February 2013, the Italian Judiciary (Tribunale di Lecce) issued a decree (n° 1451/12 V.G, Reg. 028/12) which legally confirmed the legitimate right of the d’Este Orioles family to succeed to the Ducal Title of Modena and Reggio'."

These allegations about this heretofore unknown but supposedly long-lost branch of the Estes -- that the "Orioles" secretly survived in the Este legitimate male line in Sicily, that its "rightful heir" has now been discovered and legally recognized by Italy's republican government as "Antonino V, Duke of Modena, etc.", that he is Altezza Serenissima, and that he is the current legal heir to all the sovereign prerogatives of a dynasty that has been extinct for 200 years and whose descendants lost their duchy and hereditary rights when Italy became a united country 150 years ago -- has been inserted into this article, without footnotes to any reliable source nor a link to a public, reputable website that documents these claims, which are described in the article, incredulously, in these words: "...According to the Italian Judiciary (The Duchy of Modena and Reggio was located in Italy) S.A.S Don Antonino V of Este Orioles (the legitimate successor) has the sovereign prerogatives of the Jus Maiestatis and the Jus Honorum; He also holds the titles of Duke, Count and Lord of San Giuliano, Baron of San Piero and Forestavecchia and that of Principe of Castelforte; He has also an International legal entity status as agnate in collateral line of the Estense dynasty, which was Sovereign and already ruling the Duchy of Modena at the time of Ercole III 'Provvedimento di Giustizia'."

This is a HOAX, and needs to be deleted. FactStraight (talk) 21:20, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

I have just included the link to the Italian Regional gov of Puglia where the summay of the Judiciary decree is uploaded. Araldico69 (talk) 00:01, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Section XIV of the unrevoked Transitory and Final Dispositions of the 1948 Italian Constitution states: "I titoli nobiliari non sono riconosciuti." ("Titles of nobility are not recognized"). Law courts may not and do not exercise authority to override the national Constitution. I suggest you look up ultra vires: Either this 2013 "Judiciary decree" is a fraud or it is unconstitutional. Wikipedia would need a reliable secondary source confirming validity and applicability of this decree to accept so extraordinary a claim as legitimate, and even then consensus is needed to include all these fanciful assertions -- and I dissent. FactStraight (talk) 03:21, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Key terms: Hoax means "a falsehood deliberately fabricated to masquerade as the truth" Pronouncement: the act of pronouncing, declaring, or uttering formally Defamation is a spoken or written expression which is deemed to harm the reputation of an individual and proved to be false. The Hoax claim is false and maybe considered defamatory. I have cited and posted the summary of a Judicial Pronouncement (12 pages) of the Italian Tribunale di Lecce; giving also the exact numbers of the Pronunciation to trace it. This Pronouncement exactly explains what written in the section. I also provided the link of the official website of the Puglia Gov Region where it is uploaded; so people can go directly to retrieve without any manipulations. Now do I need to explain the difference from a book source (written by individuals which could not be objective) and a formal Judiciary Pronouncement having the force of law because originated from a process of Legal scrutiny? Really?

In terms of reliable sources; this Pronouncement is a reliable source (Cf. The Oxford Standard for Citation of Legal Authorities https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/sites/files/oxlaw/oscola_2006.pdf ) I have again uploaded the link

http://www.regione.puglia.it/documents/10192/10774613/TRIBUNALE.pdf/def6927f-b70e-4cd3-b864-7b8e37ee42d8;jsessionid=C9A0ED98669B6D826B95E0C1D2F12789?version=1.1

Anyone can use Google translator and understand what it is written. I Trust I clarified the matter. Araldico69

I request you to cancel immediately the Hoax accusation as it is clear defamatory. I am not Antonino d' Este but I imagine that I would be very crossed in being accused falsely by an anonymous;if you are so convinced please reveal,your name ( this is my email societyfm@outlook.com)and take the responsibilty about what you are writing;otherwise you are not credible as you hide behind a nickname. I started to think you are not a genuine reviewer and you have an agenda.ARALDICO69

Best Araldico69 (talk) 09:57, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Ok lets try again;

1. I need to thank the admin for unblocking me; I was frustrated by the continuous accusations -that I violated not knowing the rule of "Threat of defamation" - again thank you!

2. I try to keep things civil and simple so no offence. You do not have clue about Italian laws and the issue with nobility. In all fairness I did not have a clue as well; until I started to research my family and their titles..but I am digressing. Before the unification under the Savoy there were several monarchies/Pope. These Houses have retained the Jus Maeiestatis and Fons Honorum ; here there is the explanation by one of this former dynasties (De Medici. http://www.de-medici.com/comunita-granducale-medicea/fons-honorum/il-concetto-giuridico-di-sovranita-delle-case-gia-regnanti-1) If you read you will find that the article lists FEW of them (meaning there are more). What does this mean? It means that these houses can in theory create nobles and certainly can bestow knighthood. This is not ILLEGAL; it is illegal if they sell them. You are right in saying the nobility in Italy is not recognised/abolished but this does not mean is FORBIDDEN; it means only that the state does not care and protect titles and titles cannot be used for passports etc... Quite a few of these dynasties -to protect themselves- have used the Judiciary. In Italy ironically the only way for the Nobility titles to be acknowledged and your genealogy be verified is via judiciary...

3. The Este Orioles House is made up by two families (the Este that migrated to Sicily) and the Orioles that have an important past; I am not sure where you got your sources but you cannot deny the evidence: These are only few books that speak about the Orioles family

http://www.comune.sanpieropatti.me.it/Libro%20Argeri/371-386%20Antiche%20Famiglie.pdf. (link of the official site of the Town Sanpiero Patti)

A very old book (1655)commissioned by the senate of the city of Palermo write in details about the heritage and nobility of the Orioles Family. The book is titled " Teatro Genologico delle famiglie nobili titolate feudatarie".The book is written by Dott. D. Filadelfo.

the book "Royal families of Sicilies" write about the Orioles at pag 51. https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=l2AIDgAAQBAJ&pg=PA52&lpg=PA52&dq=famiglia+nobile+orioles&source=bl&ots=91wQ8-pv_t&sig=hvCW3WMFgX981qwIx8qjz_cJj-s&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjIhP3_37PdAhXKOcAKHXWKDvsQ6AEwDHoECAMQAQ#v=onepage&q=famiglia%20nobile%20orioles&f=false

4) I cannot write an essay but quite few sources speak also of the Este in Sicily one of them is the "the Storia Illustrata" of the Mondatori Editore in the issue 255 of February 1973; it says that in Tortorici since 1586 there was a collateral branch of the Este of Modena. The Judicial Pronouncement just clarifies this; having seen all the evidence (history, the Provvedimento di Giustizia of Ercole 3 etc..) has ascertained that Antonino Este Orioles descends from Antonino Este Orioles who received the Provvedimento di Giustizia and all the prerogatives connected to it. Does this means that by law in Italy everyone must refer to him as "Sua Altezza serenissima" ? NO, it means that who still consider nobility something important for courtesy (it is a choice) can refer to him in this way. NO ONE is a Duke/Count/Prince for the Italian State ; they are all Signori.

5. The Admins can control this; you have deleted several times my section in several places; where my section/information was all pertinent; you did this without having the courtesy to discuss this with me.

Now, Wikipedia should be based on facts:

a) Did the Head of the Este Orioles Family receive a Provvedimento di Giustizia from Ercole III countersigned by the Marquis Rangone? YES; it is a fact proved by the Judicial Pronouncement

b)Is Antonino V (or if you wish call him Antonino 5.0 ; call him as you like) the direct descendant of Antonino 1.0. YES; fact

c) Does Antonino 5.0 claim the Duchy of Modena? NO; as it is not an idiot; the Duchy of Modena does not exist anymore and anyway is a collateral agnate of the Este family of Modena. However as everyone else is proud of his family history. If you go on google you will see that in many places including the "Nobility Scene" is refered as courtesy as S.A.S or Duke or Don and is involved in charity work

d)Was this section pertinent to be included in the Pages " HOUSE OF ESTE" DUKE OF MODENA AND ERCOLE III? I am afraid YES; because has a historic value why do not write it? Because you do not like it?

Look..I can understand you do not like this or you think the Judiciary Pronouncement is silly or weird..but believe me is not against the Constitution ; in his driving licence or passport I bet it is written Dott. A. Este Orioles... What I do not like (and I stop here) is that you immediately called this an Hoax when it is not; again everyone reading can find the Pronouncement; if you wish to see the Provvedimento di Giustizia just go to his webpage and with a Google translator you will understand. BTW in Italy is a crime to forge document and this has also passed the legal scrutiny. So I ask you please stop deleting this section. I am very busy I will not upload them now but when I have time sometime this week I will re-write them.

Any questions I am here to answer ; by the way I am not a "dupe" nor a hoaxer nor A. Este Orioles. Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Araldico69 (talk • contribs) 22:02, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

---

I am very disappointed that this section of the talk is still kept online when it is clear that there is no Hoax

A HOAX is a "falsehood deliberately fabricated to masquerade as the truth." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoax ). As you claim the section is a Hoax please provide proofs that:

1) Ercole III provvedimento di giustizia is forged (this check was done in the legal process and you know the result, which I understand you do not like);

2) the judicial pronouncement is a fake document and was not issued by an ITALIAN (not regional) Tribunale (city of Lecce 2017). Contact them and ask for a copy

3) after having translated the judicial pronouncement what I wrote in Italics is not true.

If you are not able to do so (of course you cannot, as the section states FACTS that can be easily checked) yours are false claims, which in another setting would have landed you to Court for defamation.

Araldico69 (talk) 13:27, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

What the hell is going on here? I got here from the Cisadane Republic article. Does Duke Hercules exist or not? 73.155.111.138 (talk) 15:15, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Duke Hercules III of Modena is a real person, but an anon user from Italy keep posting various dubious claims about the Este family and the existence of an officially recognized "Ducal House of Modena".

To Araldico69, next time you wanna use a document to "prove" rights, better mind the date : in 1798, Ercole was no longer Duke of Modena. 217.167.255.177 (talk) 10:13, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

To anonymous the date is correct 1798 Ercole was in exile and still had a full Fons Honour. Please have the courtesy to sign next time Araldico69 (talk) 17:44, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

For those of you unfamilar with Italian law, wannabe noblemen often use an exploit in the Code of Civil Procedure. In a civil suit, both parties could ask for an arbitrarily trial. If the arbitration is uncontested, the local court publish the result without changes. The thing here is to ask a friend to sue you for "usurpation of name", choose a sympathetic arbitrator, and the arbitration result in the publication of all your claims (the opposing party, of course, being so convinced by your "proofs"). That give you a judicial document to show around without any of your claims to be a "sovereign duke" actually scrutinized by a judge. 217.167.255.177 (talk) 10:53, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Dear anonymous as a law abiding citizen I always respect Judicial pronouncement of any judiciary including an Italian Tribunal but I also respect your opinion;however, I respectfully points out that the provvedimento di giustizia is a fact and it is countersigned by the Marquis Rangone. You may think 1) Ercole III went mad to issue this letter patent to an agnatic collateral branch 2) you may wonder -like I do-why he did it-

but you cannot deny that it is genuine and not a forgery. By the way as you seem very into the Italian law you should know that in Italy any noble family is a wannabe noble family as the Italian constitution does not recognise nobility. BTW The Duke Antonino V is a Jure Sanguinis knight of the Sacred Military Constantinian Order of Saint George led by Prince Pedro of Bourbon-Two Sicilies, Duke of Calabria who is member of the Spanish Royal family and his order is re-known to be thorough in admitting knights who claims to be noble. So the Duke is not a wannabe noble; Can you claim the same? Araldico69 (talk) 17:44, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

The Provvedimento may be legitimate - difficult to say without studying the material document - but, even if it is, there are two issues with it :

1. Ercole III was not a reigning Duke, but a pretender, thus the provvedimento had no legal value (same as jacobite peerage titles).
2. The Provvedimento grant the title of Duke to Antonino d'Este Orioles, but does not acknowledge his male-line descent from the house of Este. In fact, it emphasizes the nobility of the famiglia Orioles.

The (d'Este) Orioles is a former italian noble family, no argument here. But their claim to be the last line of the d'Este of Modena is unsubstantiated. 217.167.255.177 (talk) 09:25, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

---

I am disappointed that you still write anonymously a clear violation of wikipedia rules. So now you recognise that the Duke is a noble? Before you said he was a wannabe noble. Lets be clear (I am happy to reveal my identity in private as I always put my face on what I assert).

1) The Letter Patent of Ercole III is genuine;

2)the story of the D'Este family (and then D'Este Orioles family) in Tortorici is true as documented in books and in monuments (churches etc..)and by historians..

3) you conveniently put in brackets the surname d'Este; so I start to be quite suspicious about your interest in this discussion because you erase the first surname that in Italian Law shows the direct patrilineal descendent status from the D'Este of Tortorici. The family D'Este Orioles is noble because D'Este (patrilineal)and Orioles (matrilineal which you also acknowledge is/was noble).

4)The direct descendent assertion is supported by notarised Heraldic reports dated 1912 and 1922 during the Kingdom of Savoy when the Consulta Araldica operated and there were criminal sanctions if nobility titles were claimed falsely

5)A sentence of an Italian Tribunal has re-emphasised all the above points.

6) The Duke does not claim to be the pretenders of the Duchy of Modena (the Duke considers absurd only to think like this for ANY other Kingdoms that have ceased to exist) but He has full prerogatives derived by the Letter Patent dated 1798.

7) you say "former" noble ? I find extraordinary what you write. A)Nobility is not like a mozzarella -does not expire- it is intrinsically related to the history of a family; B)If I follow your logic then all nobles in Italy are former nobles as there is not anymore a state agency like the Consulta Araldica that checks and validates their status and the Constitution does not recognise nobility.

Finally documents, references,artworks, coat of arms etc.. are all in the public domain ; like the life of the Duke that unlike "other nobles" does not lucrate from his heritage but has a very successful career.

a) This is not a Hoax and should be titled as "Fons Honorum dispute" So I believe it is time to erase this highly offensive and untrue title

b) I respectfully agree to disagree with you; at the same time I think this type of debate in relation to former kingdoms is pretty normal because virtually every former kingdom has a dispute in terms of Fons Honorum just look at this list http://www.wikiwand.com/it/Pretendente_al_trono

Lets now leave the wikipedia readers forming their own opinions; the evidence is public....

Araldico69 (talk) 09:35, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

IN RELATION TO YOUR POINT 2

I paste the word by word transcription in Italian ( if I write it in English I could be accused to made up things) of the Provvedimento di Giustizia di Ercole III ; nowadays Google translate is very good and I am sure anyone in good faith can judge:

Ercole III Per la Grazia di Dio Duca di Modena, Reggio, Mirandola .&c.&c.&c.

La comprovataci Nobile Condizione della Famiglia d’ESTE ORIOLES di Tortorici, per la quale nei tempi addietro della medesima furono goduti onori e distinzioni egualmente alla famiglia Nostra, ha eccitato il grazioso animo Nostro per condiscendere ad esaudire il Conte Antonino d’Este Orioles Signore di San Giuliano nella città di Tortorici, condecorando col titolo di Duca, l’uno unitamente ai di lui figli e riconascendo le dinastiche prerogative che furono proprie nel passato, quindi è, che in virtù del presente Nostro Diploma con l’uso della Nostra Ducale Podestà, e con animo pienamente deliberato facciamo, creamo e dichiariamo Duca lo stesso Antonino riconoscendo anche li privilegi e pretensioni della Famiglia Orioles Baroni di Sampiero, Forestavecchia e principi di Castelforte, con tutti i rispettivi figli e discendenti legittimi o naturali, in infinito, con facoltà di intitolarsi tale, e tali così in voce ,come in iscritto, ed in qualunque atto pubblico, ed in forma con tutti gli Onori, preminenze, immunità, e prerogative competenti a questa nuova Loro condecorazone, e godute da chiunque altro insignito di uguali Titoli. Concediamo con la Nostra Ducale Podestà l’uso dell’Arma di Casa D’ESTE, nel cuore dello scudo inquartato : nel primo d’azzurro all’aquila bicipite d’argento; nel secondo all’arma di Casa d’Orioles nel terzo di rosso ai tre gigli d’oro posti due e uno, nel quarto d’azzurro a otto croci di S.Andrea d’argento. Comandiamo per tanto a tutti Li Ministri , Uffiziali o Sudditi Nostri di riconoscere, e trattare l’uno, e gli altri Suoi successori per tali, facendo ad essi godere, quei Privilegi, Onori e Prerogative competenti allo stesso Grado in piena esecuzione di questa Nostra Dichiarazione e volontà. In fede di che farà il presente firmato di Nostra mano, munito del consueto nostro Sigillo. E contrassegnato dal Nostro Consigliere di Stato, di Conferenza, e Ministro di Gabinetto agli affari interni. Dato in Venezia dalla Nostra D.le residenza in esilio il 30 Xbre 1798

Ercole

L.S.

Gherardo Rangone

Sigillo in Ceralacca, ricoperto di carta

---

Lets now leave the wikipedia readers forming their own opinions; the evidence is public....

Araldico69 (talk) 15:25, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

The title of this section, Hoax, is restored: You are free to disagree with it, but Wikipedia's rules do *not* allow you to alter the words of another writer on this page. I concur with the objections expressed here by 217.167.255.177, who is improperly accused of violating Wikipedia rules by using an anon account, which is untrue, as such accounts are common throughout English Wikipedia and are standard. You have been warned before in discussing this issue that it is improper to imply that posters and editors are required or expected to reveal their personal names on Wikipedia. The vast majority do not do so, and it is never legitimate to demand that anyone share such private information to establish the legitimacy of their edits, the value of which derives from the quality of content, not authorship.

All that 217.167.255.177 has acknowledged in this discussion is that there was a noble family named Orioles in Italy. In no way is that acceptance of the claims made in this article, other articles, or in the so-called House of Este Orioles that their kinship or heirship to the House of Este is valid.

Italy is not Spain, and inclusion of the name "Este" in the name "D'Este Orioles" is not proof that the Orioles descend from or are related to the House of Este which ruled the Duchy of Modena.

On the contrary, 217.167.255.177 has reiterated that the claim that the Este Orioles descend in the legitimate male line from the extinct Este dynasty remains "unsubstantiated", as I have repeatedly pointed out.

The claim that Duke Ercole III retained in exile the prerogative of a fons honorum, and that he could exercise it in absentia in favor of a long-lost alleged male-line collateral belonging to the the "Este Orioles" family is extremely dubious. It requires extraordinary proof to be included in Wikipedia as fact, because no such kinsman is previously known to have been acknowledged as ducal heir in the published history of the Duchy of Modena, which anyway had become a functioning republic by 1798.

Moreover, long before that the Duke had signed a treaty transferring his claim and rights to the sovereign Duchy of Modena, upon his death, to Ferdinand Karl, Archduke of Austria-Este, which eventually occurred, a fact well known and documented in history.

Thus, this is an attempt to use English Wikipedia to re-write the history of the Duchy of Modena and the House of Este 200 years after the fact, and without such revisionism being reflected in mainstream history.

Finally comes the specious claim that someone got an "Este Orioles" family tree notarized in 1912 and 1922. If the Consulta Araldica, or any mainstream genealogical registry of the era, acknowledged that the Este Orioles descended in the legitimate male line from the ducal House of Este, and exactly how, or ever confirmed Este Orioles heirship to the Este dynasty's titles, sovereignty and prerogatives -- that would be relevant and important information that I would be eager to see. But instead we are simply told that if a family tree notarized in Italy in 1912 or 1922 had been inaccurate, the Consuilta Araldica would have known of it and prevented or punished its allegations. That simply is not proof of its accuracy, and cannot justify inclusion of such claims in this or other articles. FactStraight (talk) 23:47, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Inline external links

Please change these into refs. Thanks. El_C 07:39, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Alfonso IV d'Este, Duke of Modena which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 01:02, 16 December 2023 (UTC)