Marriage to Commoners vs Royals/Nobles

[Morgan43201]

Why do royals marry non royals

What are the requirements for non royals marrying royals

 

[principessa]

Because their are in love with each other!

 

[Grandma828]

They need to spread the gene pool, to avoid hereditary diseases.

 

[NGalitzine]

Isnt there already a thread on this topic?

 

[sancakli70]

The corwn prince of belgium married a royal woman, Princess Mathilde was a member of the belgian nobility , the crown prince of luxembourg married a woman of the belgian nobility too. The current crown prince of lichtenstein marries the princess of Bayern, prince Hamzahs first marriage was with a princess too the princes and princesses of the gulf states marries with princesses and princes of the other gulf states Some royal members marries royals

 

[Simply Amazing]

Why do royals marry non-royals? My guess is to prevent a repeat of WWI

This is a pretty valid question. If you take into consideration several of the disappointing royal-commoner relationships throughout Europe in recent years, it might give one cause for pause. However, I am of the belief that "those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it".

At the start of the 20th century, Germany had produced several "eligible" (the only qualification, she was a princess) consorts for various thrones throughout Europe (Sweden, Greece and Russia). Not to mention, the half-German "Grandmama of Europe" (Queen Victoria) had no less than 7 grandchildren sitting on (or near) many of these thrones which created something of a family of nations. Flash-forward a dozen years into the new century and you have cousins on both sides of the fence, trying to kill each other off. Revolution gripped a few, grizzly murders took off others. It was total chaos everywhere that something had to give.

Enter the very British King George V. Backed by astute-minded advisors and forward-thinking politicians, he assessed the social/cultural/political climate of the moment and took swift action in "modernizing" the British monarchy. Beginning with the change in the royal name from the German Saxe-Coburg and Gotha to the more patriotic and thoroughly English Windsor, the king reinvented his dynasty and ensured that by taking simple, unaffected steps (such as permitting his own children to marry their fellow countrymen, rather than foreign royals of probable German descent), his throne would be safeguarded for generations to come.

 

[nascarlucy]

I don't think royals set out to marry someone who is non-royal or make it their plan to do so. Falling in Love is probably the most common reason why they marry a non-royal. In countries where marriages are not arranged, usually this is the reason why people marry in general.

To my knowledge no book or manual exists on what the requirement(s) would be to be a royal bride as this would vary from country to country. Certain things of course would be expected of them as it would anyone who married into royalty.

 

[Lumutqueen]

Simple. Because they can and that's the person they're in love with.

 

[COUNTESS]

Royals marry non-royals, whatever royal, actually, is because in this century they have realized that it is foolish to marry people, just because they are related to one place or another. They, also, realized, intermarriage causes many undesirable traits in humans. Today, we have a refreshing group of lovely women who have married into the western monarchial system. They have brought style, class and an openness, that has kept these monarchies in place.

 

[BrazilianEmpire]

Until recently, if a Prince or Princess of Brazil decided to marry a commoner, he or she would have had to renounce his/her rights to the Throne (even with Brazil being a Republic for more than a century), but things seems to be changing.

Princess Amélia of Brazil, fifth in the Line of Succession, will marry a Scottish commoner, James Spearman, next year, and seems that she'll keep her Dynastic rights.

I have to reckon that only now I'm starting to embrace such a change.

 

[Lee-Z]

What rules there are on the subject differs greatly per family, i'm sure there still are some royal families (non-reigning maybe more often than reigning) who would still prefer a royal spouse (when someone wants to remain in line of the inheritance etc).
However, in many royal families it hasn't been an issue for ages...

 

[nascarlucy]

I'm sure that most royal families would like it if their child or children married into other royal households but at the same time they realize that this may not always been the best choice of spouse. Someone who is royal may not be suitable or a good match for their child or their family. A person who isn't royal but comes from a good family background and who can handle the pressures of being royal or who can adapt to the family dynamics might be or would be a much better choice for a spouse.

 

[blauerengel]

Royals marry non-royals, whatever royal, actually, is because in this century they have realized that it is foolish to marry people, just because they are related to one place or another. They, also, realized, intermarriage causes many undesirable traits in humans. Today, we have a refreshing group of lovely women who have married into the western monarchial system. They have brought style, class and an openness that has kept these monarchies in place.

Very true, I also believe that the commoners who have married into royal families are a breath of fresh air and most of them have done pretty well in their job. We have Queen Silvia,Queen Sonja,Queen Maxima,CP Letizia,CP Mary,CP Mette-Marit,Duchess of Cambridge any many more who seem to have adjusted quite well into the royal life.
I would not like to miss anyone of them To be fair, we also have to give credit to the men who have married into a RF-like Prince Daniel,who is such a lovely husband and father!

I believe that the royals simply "fall in love" with a certain person, just like anyone else does, regardless of who they are or what sort of social class they come from....the only difference is that nowadays they are allowed to marry someone regardless of social class or background.
It seems to be much easier for royals to find personal happiness today-when we look back in history we read about many arranged marriages between royals who were absolutely mis-matched,they had to suffer a lot from the consequences of these unfortunate marriages and I am glad that the modern royals do not have to live with so much misery.

 

[nascarlucy]

Royals today have more access to commoners than they did 100 years ago or even 50 years ago. In most countries they was a very rigid social order which would not allow this or severely restricted it.

A Prince or Princess or royal can go to college and met someone who isn't royal, fall in love with them and get married. This wasn't possible 100 years ago or even 50 years ago.

For centuries royals or others knew that some of these matches weren't good but they weren't thinking about the couple. A lot of it had to do with how it would benefit the family economically, socially or politically and this often was at the expense of the couple wants or needs which sad to say they really didn't care about. Continuing the royal line by having children was the most important thing to them, above all else and if the couple was mismatched, disliked each other, oh well, such is life.

 

[Imanmajed]

Why do royals marry non royals?

Why not? Why do men marry women? Royals are also human only. And if love is in the air.....

 

[Iluvbertie]

The downside to marrying commoners is that if they are able to marry the 'girl next door' why should they have more privileges that the girl on the other side?

 

[Moonmaiden23]

I'm sure that most royal families would like it if their child or children married into other royal households but at the same time they realize that this may not always been the best choice of spouse. Someone who is royal may not be suitable or a good match for their child or their family. A person who isn't royal but comes from a good family background and who can handle the pressures of being royal or who can adapt to the family dynamics might be or would be a much better choice for a spouse.

I agree with this.

 

[Mariel]

Iluvbertie, as long as there is a thread of royal genes in each generation (getting less with every generation) I guess the public thinks they are royal, this being as much familial tradition as actual bloodline, the girl next door who marries the prince will become royal.
I hope they NEVER return to marrying their cousins. It's a scandal which is prohibited by their own church, but they broke church law for generations.

 

[nascarlucy]

I would imagine the ways things are going that in the next 100 years or so, you will have very very few European royals who actually have strong royal blood lines or the blood line will be distant. Most likely they still would be among the elite in their country but would be non-reigning for the most part. They will have stories to tell their family about the days when their families were reigning royalty. There will be interesting stories just as people in the United States who are descended from US presidents have interesting stories and many of these individuals are among the elite in the United States.

A good example of this is actor Tom Hanks who is distantly related to Abraham Lincoln via Nancy Hanks who was Lincoln's mother. Interesting story.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

I have thought about the scenario of gradually disappearing Royal bloodlines and in a sense it makes me very sad. These Royals form a living, human link taking us back in time and history as a connection to their cultures, and their often glorious history.

Once that disappears and we have only ties linking back to average everyday people, there will actually be very little to justify keeping the various Royal families even as a symbol. It's why I hope the current generation of Royal children will revive the custom of marrying nobility and Royals....even if it's only a brief revival.

Otherwise, from an historical and genealogical perspective what is the point?

I too am very fascinated by the Tom Hanks/Abraham Lincoln blood ties.

 

[AristoCat]

Tell the truth, the argument for royalty is that they are a living symbol of history and that they keep traditional history (past) alive and yet, I do not think that the young royals even give a fig about their past. I'll never understand why they don't marry people from dethroned houses, since I believe the genetic link might not be that strong in the first place. Now to me, frankly, the commoner wives don't seem interested in the history of their country and royal family that they've married into and it's a shame it's turned out this way. This royals have lineage connected directly to the historical figures we read about in textbooks and it doesn't seem to matter to them.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

Good post AristoCat, but in all fairness to the non Royal consorts many of their own citizens, particularly the young, don't care about things like history, tradition and links to the past either.

The most popular Royal princesses are the ones who are well dressed and stylish. These are things that the average person connects with and identifies with now, unlike days gone by when the populace usually exulted and felt great pride when their CP's established a marital link with a prestigious dynasty.

Very few care about that now.

 

[NGalitzine]

In the UK selecting a bride from some long dethroned family in Germany still would not be terribly popular and you can bet the tabloids would dig up some Nazi grandfather or other relative of this blue blooded princess from Germany. Frankly I think we quite like the idea of our royal family becoming more and more British, in effect more representative of the nation, as each generation comes along but then the British have always been less impressed by "bloodlines" than the continentals.

 

[FanofMonaco]

It's not the royal bloodline that's important. It's the strength in leadership that keeps the family in power. The best prospects are not from royal houses.

 

[AristoCat]

In the UK selecting a bride from some long dethroned family in Germany still would not be terribly popular and you can bet the tabloids would dig up some Nazi grandfather or other relative of this blue blooded princess from Germany..

Well, there are more than German princesses out there; there are Russian royals and aristocrats, there are French royals and aristocrats, there are Polish royals and aristocrats, there are plenty of endless Italian aristocrats and princesses. There is an endless phalanx of royalties out there with insanely impressive lineage and no connections to Nazis and I don't think I mind commoners, just that they don't use their title to run around gaining immediate entree into jet set parties and other such events. It's too bad that the reigning royals restrict themselves to German/Danish brides when there are plenty of suitable choices from other European families.

 

[NGalitzine]

Well, there are more than German princesses out there; there are Russian royals and aristocrats, there are French royals and aristocrats, there are Polish royals and aristocrats, there are plenty of endless Italian aristocrats and princesses. There is an endless phalanx of royalties out there with insanely impressive lineage and no connections to Nazis and I don't think I mind commoners, just that they don't use their title to run around gaining immediate entree into jet set parties and other such events. It's too bad that the reigning royals restrict themselves to German/Danish brides when there are plenty of suitable choices from other European families.

Putting aside religious differences, the Russian, French and Italian royal families all have internal disputes of their own about who is head of their house and who is or is not a member of their family. Generally we would much rather UK royals marry someone from home and leave the continentals on the continent.

 

[Nordic]

Tell the truth, the argument for royalty is that they are a living symbol of history and that they keep traditional history (past) alive and yet, I do not think that the young royals even give a fig about their past. I'll never understand why they don't marry people from dethroned houses, since I believe the genetic link might not be that strong in the first place. Now to me, frankly, the commoner wives don't seem interested in the history of their country and royal family that they've married into and it's a shame it's turned out this way. This royals have lineage connected directly to the historical figures we read about in textbooks and it doesn't seem to matter to them.

And how do you know this?? Pretty sweeping statement, I think...

 

[Skippyboo]

In the UK, William marrying some Princess from Russia or Italy or Poland doesn't really help. Being 4 generations from when your family was in power, doesn't help you in knowing how to become a British queen. Plus, the people will resent you as a outsider.

They still attack Philip as a outsider after 60 plus years of service to the UK. Marrying into a royal family especially the British is a learn on the job scenario and it helps if the royal you married you married for love not that he/she is a royal and there are way more non royals than royals out there. So the odds are in the non royals favor if the royal is given the freedom to choose his/her spouse.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

In the UK selecting a bride from some long dethroned family in Germany still would not be terribly popular and you can bet the tabloids would dig up some Nazi grandfather or other relative of this blue blooded princess from Germany. Frankly I think we quite like the idea of our royal family becoming more and more British, in effect more representative of the nation, as each generation comes along but then the British have always been less impressed by "bloodlines" than the continentals.

Among the high British aristocracy, that has historically been quite far from the truth. As recently as the 1980's and the marriage of the Prince of Wales to Lady Diana Spencer all one could read in the paper for weeks and months was rather awestruck stories about the young woman's glorious Spencer lineage linking her back to Charles II and beyond, and her strong ties to British history.

Even Kate reportedly suffered snide mockery from William's posh aristocratic friends because her parents were middle class.("doors to manual"!)

Traditionally, Britain has been one of the most class conscious countries in Europe. The Windsors and the aristocracy have become more open to commoners now because frankly they don't seem to have much of a choice.

 

[AristoCat]

I think it's two reasons that non-royals are so appealing:

Reverse Snobbery
Public pressure for a 'fairytale'
Idealization of the 'down to earth commoner'
The prince is going through a rebellious phase
Commoners supposedly had a 'happy' family