The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #141  
Old 08-02-2010, 10:15 AM
nascarlucy's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Central Florida Area, United States
Posts: 1,335
The problem is not the commoner causing difficulties in royal households. Children born out of wedlock occurred long before royalty marrying commoners even came into being. So did marital or problems getting along with inlaws. Other problems also existed but where hidden from public view. It's easy to blame commoners rather than saying perhaps some of these problems have to do with the individual not being very responsible or perhaps using poor judgement.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 08-02-2010, 10:20 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 638
Quote:
Originally Posted by karima View Post
it seems to be a trend, nowadays, that Princes and Princesses marry ordinary people. Charles and Camilla, Haakon and MM, Frederic and Mary, Felipe and Laetizia, VIctoria and her gym teacher.........

what do you think about that? Have they or are they getting resistance from the royal families?

I confess I have not read the entire thread, just random posts here & there, but the topic intrigues me. :)

Here is my take (btw I believe in ruling with an iron fist wrapped in a velvet glove):

Imho royal/princely laws should become more strict, not lax, as the latter is becoming the norm due to public outcry. However, this shouldn't matter, popularity shouldn't matter, only tradition.

And of course when I say more strict, I also take into consideration marrying a commoner. If a member of the immediate HRH/HSH royal/princely family chooses to do so, especially the heir, then his/her title should be stripped and off they go to live a life of f-r-e-e-d-o-m, wherein anything goes. At that point they have no obligations, no responsibilites, no worries, and can do whatever they like to their hearts' content, be it posing nude, becoming a porn star, joining a satanic cult, marrying a dog/cat/snake/horse, or defecating in public. It will no longer matter, s/he is no longer a member of said HSH/HRH royal/princely family, and is no longer a role model. So be it. That is their choice. Time to live like a commoner and make their own way in life.

That is my wish, and that is the way I feel deep down inside, though I may smile and genuinely like said commoner, I don't condone the practice, though I know it is not their fault. The fault, and yes it is a fault in mine eyes, lies with said princely/royal family. Give me a monarch any day that will rule with an iron fist (oops, and wrapped in a velvet glove to take the sting off)!
__________________

__________________
"only as high as I reach can I grow, only as far as I seek can I go, only as deep as I look can I see, only as much as I dream can I be"
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 08-02-2010, 10:33 AM
nascarlucy's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Central Florida Area, United States
Posts: 1,335
The end result of strict rules (high rates of marital unhappiness due to limiting choices of mates, rampant adultery). This is what happened when they were in effect. Go back into the history books. There has to be a balance. Either extreme strict and lax is not good. Commoner is not the problem which a lot of people on this blog seem to think that it is. If commoners were the problem, then all these things would have occurred in recent times.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 08-02-2010, 05:54 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 4,527
The bottom line is that there is going to need to be some type of balance between Royals marrying commoners and other Royals...this trend of commoner marriages might look romantic on the surface, but if it continues UNINTERRUPTED for the next generation or two what you are going to have is a bunch of average joes marrying one another, wearing Crown Jewels and living in palaces...playacting at being Royalty because they will have very little Royal blood.

I don't think it is a coincidence that the republican, anti-monarchist grumbling has coincided with the increase in Royals marrying their subjects...who in a couple of cases are not only commoners, but COMMON commoners at that.

There can and should be Royal/Royal or Royal/Noble marriages too, to balance things out.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 08-02-2010, 09:07 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 638
I fear this trend will only get worse, in fact I know so, and I'm talking society as a whole. One only need look at history, the days of the Bible, to see the future. Man never learns.

I have a friend whom is a theology expert, studied at several college/universities, a literal genius when it comes to theology. In fact he graduated from Harvard's Advanced Theologian Program, or was it Princeton (he went to both), whatever, some ivy league college. Anyhow, he's like a monk, never seen a-n-y-o-n-e with his faith, a true man of God. So anyways, he told me something once that I have never forgotten, about the signs of the decay of society, and how there are pictorials (never seen by the public, only theology scholars) that actually depict fallen societies, and believe me what he described was not pretty/wicked in fact.

Sorry for straying off topic everybody, but it does relate to this issue, however I will speak no more of it. I am done with this thread, carry on. :)
__________________
"only as high as I reach can I grow, only as far as I seek can I go, only as deep as I look can I see, only as much as I dream can I be"
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 08-02-2010, 10:23 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,468
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
The bottom line is that there is going to need to be some type of balance between Royals marrying commoners and other Royals...this trend of commoner marriages might look romantic on the surface, but if it continues UNINTERRUPTED for the next generation or two what you are going to have is a bunch of average joes marrying one another, wearing Crown Jewels and living in palaces...playacting at being Royalty because they will have very little Royal blood.

I don't think it is a coincidence that the republican, anti-monarchist grumbling has coincided with the increase in Royals marrying their subjects...who in a couple of cases are not only commoners, but COMMON commoners at that.

There can and should be Royal/Royal or Royal/Noble marriages too, to balance things out.
That's all you ever had. There is nothing special about royalty. Just their ancestors had big swords and took power and then claimed they were anointed by God, which was all nonsense. The more educated people become the more they see the fallacy of these times. There are quite COMMON royals, too. There is no "Royal Blood", just familes that have held power over people for generations. All blood is the same. All people are the same.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 08-02-2010, 10:25 PM
nascarlucy's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Central Florida Area, United States
Posts: 1,335
A lot of royalty are related by the link of cousinry. Some of the bloodlines are too closely related for marriage. This is probably one reason why it's difficult for royals to marry other royals. Cousin 11 times removed, Cousin 15 times removed. The link is still there even if its distant or remote. A commoner usually doesn't have this link. A commoner is a new blood line with new links.

Kings and other male royals fathered children with women who were average Jane's. Many of these children were given titles even though they only were 1/2 royal. Many of the European nobility and royalty if they went back into their ancestry would find an average Jane as their link to royalty. Commoner blood in royalty is a lot more common than one would think.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 08-02-2010, 10:59 PM
CrownPrincessJava's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ,, Australia
Posts: 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by COUNTESS View Post
That's all you ever had. There is nothing special about royalty. Just their ancestors had big swords and took power and then claimed they were anointed by God, which was all nonsense. The more educated people become the more they see the fallacy of these times. There are quite COMMON royals, too. There is no "Royal Blood", just familes that have held power over people for generations. All blood is the same. All people are the same.
Exactly.

The role of royalty has changed considerably over the past 100 years, especially since the two world wars of the past century. Royal families to not hold legislative or military power, nor do they need to make "alliances" to ensure territories will not be invaded. "Power" has been given to people we have elected: governments. Especially in the case in the scandinavian countries, governments have the power to render an heir out of succession. Yes, some hold the power to dissolve parliament, but they also know the backlash that would occur by the people if they tried to exercise that. They are now a symbol of the history of a country, and at the end of the day, Royal families bring in tourism dollars.

Then you have the issue of genetics. Most of the European royal houses are related, and it is not seen as socially acceptable to inbreed - and rightfully so. They had to look outside the royal gene pool.

The third point - marketing. We all know that one referendum and a constitutional monarchy turns into a democratic republic overnight. They need to relate to the everyday peerson. It's the whole mystic that a Crown Prince or Crown Princess falls in love and marries "one of us" and the fairytale begins. We become more interested in royalty because we can now relate to them. Job done - the republicans are now silenced and the Royal Families can still try to exercise the little power they still have. People here need to remember that most of the Crown Princesses, Princess and Prince Consorts around the world are intelligent who held their own before marrying into royalty.

But I have to agree with some of the comments. As further generations of royalty are born, a distinction between "true" royal and "common" royal will become apparent. As in the case in Belgium, their Crown Princess is of aristocratic blood, thus "a true royal". It will be interesting to see whether they will label Princess Elisabeth the last "true royal Crown Princess" when her father succeeds the throne and if she marries a commoner.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 08-04-2010, 03:12 AM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 4,527
As further generations of royalty are born, a distinction between "true" royal and "common" royal will become apparent. As in the case in Belgium, their Crown Princess is of aristocratic blood, thus "a true royal". It will be interesting to see whether they will label Princess Elisabeth the last "true royal Crown Princess" when her father succeeds the throne and if she marries a commoner...QUOTE]

This is the point I am trying to make and I think this is indeed going to happen...there will be "true" Royals with noble lineages dating back centuries linking the perspective countries and peoples to their ancient histories and traditions...then you will have Queen or King Commoner...whose mummy was an air hostess, whose daddy was a cabdriver, who's great grandma was a seamstress...

And the reasons to question the existence of these types of dynasties will grow ever more widespread...especially if certain ones continue to behave badly.

"Why do we need these people...why do we pay for them...THEY ARE JUST LIKE US AFTER ALL."

It is a very fine line to walk.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old 10-07-2010, 04:24 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: here and there, Greece
Posts: 535
I think that the " they are just like us" thought is indeed a large problem. But to me , it does not only apply to blood but to behaviour. For example when I see QEII I think "she is royal" but not just because she is King George VI's daughter - because of her public image and her ways and behaviour when in public. To me , the behaviour factor can be just as important as the bloodline, because IMO there are people who can live up to the expactations , without having royal or aristocratic blood perfectly well, even if they don't seem ideal at first sight. Princess Lilian of Sweden who was a divorced commoner and yer stayed all these years next to Bertil out of the limelight when they were not married and has behaved in an excellent way since. Or the wife of CP Alexander of Yugoslavia, who seems to offer to her husband the support he needs in his plans. His first wife was a Princess and that marriage didn't last, while he just celebrated his silver wedding anniversary with his second, commoner wife. It's all a matter of circumstances I believe.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #151  
Old 10-07-2010, 10:03 PM
nascarlucy's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Central Florida Area, United States
Posts: 1,335
How a person conducts themselves and how they treat others around them is a more clearer indication of their character than their social standing. Someone of a higher standing is given a pass for their behavior. Someone who is of a much lower standing doesn't get a pass or given the benefit of the doubt when they conduct themselves badly or treat people badly.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 10-07-2010, 11:49 PM
doric44's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: toronto, Canada
Posts: 147
its a difficult subject any way you look at it the royal families esp in europe walk a knife edge in regards to justifying their existence. With no real authority in governance they dont really do anything of significance.

so marrying commoners to appear to be closer to the people to increase support or interest in them may or may not work long term.
there is that balance that they need to achieve different and special. But not too common because if they essentially become simply commoner royals.
Then whats the point of a royal family ? a elected president who is a figurehead could do the ceremonial job just as well

it will be interesting to see how the public really reacts when Elisabeth, Beatrix,Margrethe,Carl Gustaf etc start to pass and their children take up the thrones if the experiment has truly worked.

but also the changing demographics of europe will impact this as well europe in 30- 50 years is going to look alot darker and Muslim. this change is already slowly starting in the Lichtenstein Princely family.

who knows maybe the children of crown princesses and princes right now may save their royal thrones by marrying into Asian and Islamic royal families from the middle east in 30 years who knows ?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 10-08-2010, 03:27 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by doric44 View Post
its a difficult subject any way you look at it the royal families esp in europe walk a knife edge in regards to justifying their existence. With no real authority in governance they dont really do anything of significance.
I don't think any European royal family "walks on a knifes" edge at the moment. For a lot of people they do a lot of significant things.

Quote:
Originally Posted by doric44 View Post
so marrying commoners to appear to be closer to the people to increase support or interest in them may or may not work long term.
there is that balance that they need to achieve different and special. But not too common because if they essentially become simply commoner royals.
Then whats the point of a royal family ? a elected president who is a figurehead could do the ceremonial job just as well
I believe they marry "commoners" for love, not just to get closer to the people.
And an elected president couldn't do the job just as well as the Monarch, they wouldn't have the same sense in the job.

Quote:
Originally Posted by doric44 View Post
but also the changing demographics of europe will impact this as well europe in 30- 50 years is going to look alot darker and Muslim. this change is already slowly starting in the Lichtenstein Princely family.
What do you mean?

Quote:
Originally Posted by doric44 View Post
who knows maybe the children of crown princesses and princes right now may save their royal thrones by marrying into Asian and Islamic royal families from the middle east in 30 years who knows ?
Doubt it very much.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 10-08-2010, 09:57 AM
Al_bina's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: City, Kazakhstan
Posts: 5,604
I believe that doric44 referred to the fact that Prince Maximilian of Lichtenstein married Ms.Angela Brown, who is an Afro-Panamanian descent.
__________________
"I never did mind about the little things" Amanda, "Point of No Return"
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 10-08-2010, 12:04 PM
doric44's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: toronto, Canada
Posts: 147
yes they do walk a knife edge if they act too frivolous or out of touch or in a way that angers the public. in one act of parliament or a referendum they could be gone Queen elisabeth was close after Diana's death

they may marry for love but these people have been marrying for centuries to acquire things or gain power not about love .
it may be cynical on my part but if they felt marrying commoners would gain them good PR i think they would do it.

the Lichtenstein family already as a Afro-Panamanian woman in the family Denmark's Prince Joachim married a woman of Anglo Chinese ethnicity

and who knows in 40 years many European countries will have large or even majority Asian and Muslim populations. it may be a natural course of things that a number of the members of the royal houses of europe marry people of eastern and or Muslim persuasion.
40 years ago no one would have thought royals marrying divorcees or single mothers would ever happen so who knows
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 10-08-2010, 12:31 PM
Al_bina's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: City, Kazakhstan
Posts: 5,604
I do not think that marriages between Asian, Middle Eastern and European royal/noble house will happen any time soon because the Asian and Middle Eastern royal/noble houses are more orthodox in this respect than their European counterparts. The Japanese Imperial House is likely to never allow one of their members to marry a gaijin.
__________________
"I never did mind about the little things" Amanda, "Point of No Return"
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 10-08-2010, 12:51 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by doric44 View Post
yes they do walk a knife edge if they act too frivolous or out of touch or in a way that angers the public. in one act of parliament or a referendum they could be gone Queen elisabeth was close after Diana's death
So they could walk on a knifes edge, but they aren't at the moment.
Diana's death did barely anything for the republican movement in the UK.

Quote:
Originally Posted by doric44 View Post
they may marry for love but these people have been marrying for centuries to acquire things or gain power not about love .
it may be cynical on my part but if they felt marrying commoners would gain them good PR i think they would do it.
No "May" about it, it's quite obvious that they marry for love, else we would see the present crop of Princes/s marrying other royals would we not?
You have a low opinion on the feelings of royals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by doric44 View Post
the Lichtenstein family already as a Afro-Panamanian woman in the family Denmark's Prince Joachim married a woman of Anglo Chinese ethnicity
Two people in how many years of having Monarchies in the world?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Al_bina View Post
I do not think that marriages between Asian, Middle Eastern and European royal/noble house will happen any time soon because the Asian and Middle Eastern royal/noble houses are more orthodox in this respect than their European counterparts. The Japanese Imperial House is likely to never allow one of their members to marry a gaijin.
Exactly my point, there is a difference between divorcees and people with different relgious beliefs.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 10-08-2010, 03:56 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,468
Look they marry commoners, because we are all the same and that idea that they are better is fading. Monachies are an archaic relic that have moderized in some nations to continue to exist, but they know what line they have to walk. Also, marriage between other royalties do not matter anymore, no one makes alliances that way. They can't. They are just figureheads.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 10-14-2010, 10:13 PM
nascarlucy's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Central Florida Area, United States
Posts: 1,335
You wonder when there were marriages for alliances or to better the relationship of the two countries if this worked all the time? I guess sometimes it did and sometimes it didn't. Even among families you have people who fight with each other all the time or who just don't get along. Royals are no different in this regard.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 11-19-2010, 05:37 AM
Duke of Marmalade's Avatar
Majesty
TRF Author
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Posts: 8,511
Wills'n'Kate, just another example of the trend to marry commoners who might suffer in the end not being used to royal life and media scrutiny in the first place.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/17/wo...ng.html?src=mv
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

« Royals Murdered | - »

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth bourbon-parma charlene chris o'neill crown prince felipe crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events engagement fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta elena infanta sofia jewellery jordan kate middleton king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympics ottoman picture of the month pieter van vollenhoven pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess mary queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit visit wedding william



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:54 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]