The house of Bonaparte???

Netherlands Template‑class

This template falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands articles Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Royalty and Nobility

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Royalty and Nobility, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of royalty and nobility on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Royalty and NobilityWikipedia:WikiProject Royalty and NobilityTemplate:WikiProject Royalty and NobilityRoyalty and Nobility articles

I think this is strange. Either we include all monarchs ruling over the Netherlands; including Charles V the Holy Roman emperors, Charlemagne etc etc; or we only list the monarch of the current Kingdom of the Netherlands. It seem highly arbitrary to list the dynasties of the different states Kingdom of Holland and the Kingdom of the Netherlands while leaving out the Habsburg monarchs.Arnoutf (talk) 12:22, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

They weren't monarchs of the Netherlands since there were no united Netherlands back then. They were Duke of Brabant, Count of Holland etc. Känsterle (talk) 15:16, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Euhm Philips II was King over the United Netherlands; so (it could be argued) where all Holy Roman Emperors until 1648; Charlemagne was King over the Netherlands. So were several Roman Emperors. Saying that they were not the Netherlands is just a linguistic difference. Either list the monarch of the current Netherlands (ie Willem I and later) or name all the kings who ever ruled the combined lands now called Netherlands. Naming only one previous state that did so seems arbitrary (the moe so as that state was a French subsidiary, much more then the 17 provinces ever were a subsidiary of Charles V empire. Arnoutf (talk) 14:18, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes; but whilst they may have reigned over what is today's territory of the Netherlands, nevertheless they were not monarchs of an independent country called 'the Netherlands'-that disdn't exist until the sixteenth century, and wasn't even a monarchy until 1815, and as for Louis Bonaparte; he was King of Holland, not the Netherlands. A slight, but important difference.JWULTRABLIZZARD (talk) 10:34, 22 March 2012 (UTC)