The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #281  
Old 06-20-2015, 01:39 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 1,662
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cris M View Post
Prince Alexandre was born without succession rights, because of the morganatic nature of his parents marriage.

Although I know some people say this is questionable.

That interpretation is disputed. Some commentators say there was no legal basis to exclude him from the succession on that reasoning, because he was a legitimate male descendant in male line of King Leopold I. He would have been excluded anyway though when he married Princess Léa in secret without the King's consent.

Prince Alexandre's sisters on the other hand never had succession rights to begin with since cognatic succession only applies to descendants of King Albert II. The status of their parents' marriage is irrelevant then in that case.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #282  
Old 06-20-2015, 01:47 PM
Cris M's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Niterói, Brazil
Posts: 825
I know, I was just pointing out there are different interpretations regarding Prince Alexandre's succession rights.
__________________

__________________
“If a thousand thrones I had, I would give a thousand thrones to get the slaves free in Brazil."

Princess Isabel (1846-1921), Princess Imperial and Regent of the Empire of Brazil, after she signed the Golden Law, in 1888, abolishing slavery in Brazil.
Reply With Quote
  #283  
Old 06-20-2015, 02:28 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,702
Are the only scenarios of a royal marrying a commoner going wrong, Masako and maybe kinda sorta Mette Marit? Those are good numbers considering how many of these marriages have taken place. Isn't Princess Kiko also a commoner? She wouldn't be considered a disaster even before her son was born. I think the main point is that a successful royal isn't based on what family you were born into but on who you are as a person. Those with long pedigrees have been good and bad at their jobs, and those with no pedigree have been good and bad at their jobs.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #284  
Old 06-20-2015, 03:05 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 6,308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
As I mentioned before, it is not true, even today, that anyone can marry into the royal family. No matter if the chosen bride/groom is noble or a "commoner", royal marriages still have to be pre-approved either by the monarch and the government, or by the parliament depending on the country. If a royal prince or princess marries "for love", but doesn't get the necessary approval, he/she and all descendants of that union are excluded from the line of succession as was the case of Prince Friso of the Netherlands, Princesses Irene and Christina of the Netherlands, Prince Alexandre of Belgium, etc etc

In that sense, all royal brides/grooms (or, all royal brides/groom up to a certain position in the line of succession as in the UK now) go through a vetting process, which is very reassuring for the monarchy as an institution.

BTW, "unworthy commoners" that are frequently despised here like Prince Daniel and Princess Sofia of Sweden have also gone through that process and both the King of Sweden and, most significantly, the elected Swedish government thought they were suitable to join the Bernadotte family !

Realistically, when was the last time permission to marry was denied by the Crown or Government? Was it Mabel in the Netherlands? She was the exception and not the rule.

With all due respect, and especially after the wedding in Sweden last week I stand by my opinion that now anything/anyone goes. As the Beatles once sang All ya need is love!!(and a hardworking Palace p.r. team)

And contrary to being despised as an unworthy commoner Prince Daniel is one of the most liked and respected Royal spouses on this Forum. He has lots of fans. I am one of them.
__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena
Reply With Quote
  #285  
Old 06-20-2015, 03:06 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 1,662
Why do you say Masako is an example of a marriage going wrong ? Unfortunately she had a miscarriage, and later had a lovely daughter but was unable to produce a male heir, which is a big deal in a country with agnatic succession like Japan. All that, coupled with peculiarities of the Japanese culture, led to a breakdown. That doesn't make her marriage a failure or a mistake though, nor does it have anything to do specifically with her being a commoner. Empress Michiko, who is married to a monarch who 70 years ago would have been considered divine by his people, is also a commoner and perfectly fine. In fact, if Japanese emperors, who belong to a royal line that goes back more than a thousand years, are free to marry commoners, I suppose any other ordinary monarch can do it as well !
Reply With Quote
  #286  
Old 06-20-2015, 03:26 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 1,662
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
Realistically, when was the last time permission to marry was denied by the Crown or Government? Was it Mabel in the Netherlands? She was the exception and not the rule.

With all due respect, and especially after the wedding in Sweden last week I stand by my opinion that now anything/anyone goes. As the Beatles once sang All ya need is love!!(and a hardworking Palace p.r. team)

And contrary to being despised as an unworthy commoner Prince Daniel is one of the most liked and respected Royal spouses on this Forum. He has lots of fans. I am one of them.

Princess Mabel is probably the last case of consent being denied upon request. There were other cases though of individuals who were excluded because they didn't ask for consent, but married anyway like Pieter-Christiaan, Floris and recently Amedeo of Belgium.


Having said that, at some point there were doubts about whether Maxima would be approved or not (because of her father's background) and I'm pretty sure, judging from Daniel's and Carl Philip's wedding speeches and how long their respective engagements were delayed, that there was once considerable resistance to approving their marriages.
Reply With Quote
  #287  
Old 06-20-2015, 03:36 PM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Christmas Island
Posts: 5,552
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolph View Post
So there we have it. Commoners have married into every royal family from Sweden to Denmark, from Luxembourg to Britain. Non seem to be on the verge of collapse over it
The collapse of monarchies will come sooner than you think. And when one collapses, for an example in Sweden or Belgium, the others in Norway, the Netherlands, etc. will become very wobbly too.

When one country opened the Iron Curtain in 1989, soon the one after the other Communist regime collapsed. Who would ever have thought to see a unified Germany, to see all the former East Bloc being members of NATO and EU? Who would ever have thought the proud French giving up their Franc and the self-assured Germans their Deutschmark? It happened and sooner than anyone realized.

Who thought that a Kadhafi, a Mubarak, an Assad, etc.would all fall, one by one, just because in one North-African country (Tunisia) the people came on the street and revolted? Who could have foreseen or even imagined all what happened?

The same with the monarchies. When a modern West-European country decides that monarchy should be ended in a neat and peaceful way, it will work like domino-stones. Exactly like once a modern West-European country legalized same-gender marriages and it spread across Europe. Exactly like one monarchy started to make the succession absolute primogeniture and it spread across Europe. Exactly like Beatrix and even the Pope adbicated and suddenly the "taboo" on abdications in never-thought monarchies like Spain or Belgium was gone too.

With other words. Marrying for popularity but not looking to the fundamental principles of what monarchy and/or nobility means will lead to their downfall. You say, none seem on the verge of collapse. Indeed, but the examples I mentioned above showed how quick things can change.

I can assure you: du moment the Parliament in Sweden, with all gratitude and respect and with gentlemanlike and generous arrangements, decides to end the monarchy and makes Sweden a republic. (It can be any other monarchy anyway). You can be sure that in Brussels or in The Hague or in Madrid politicians will call for a "national debate" and "it is time for our country to adapt to modern time", etc. It is my strong conviction that all monarchies hang on a thin line. That thin line is the specialness of the institution, the attachment the people have to it, the uniqueness of the royal family. As all this has gone, the thin line becomes ultrathin and utmost vulnerable.

Anyway, every individual will have an own opinion on the matter. But be sure, like the amazing and unbelievable examples I have given (the collapse of the Iron Curtain, the German unification, the opening of all EU borders and the birth of a common currrency, the Arab Spring,) that the start always seemed a futile event with unforeseen consequences.
Reply With Quote
  #288  
Old 06-20-2015, 03:49 PM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Christmas Island
Posts: 5,552
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post

[...]

And contrary to being despised as an unworthy commoner Prince Daniel is one of the most liked and respected Royal spouses on this Forum. He has lots of fans. I am one of them.
Daniel is doing a fine job so far but when anyone can do this, it is the best plea to end the circus. By the way, the popularity of the Swedish monarchy, despite all the happy events, is not that high, in comparison with some other monarchies.

And... who says that someone, eeeerhmmmm, let us say Jean-Christophe Bonaparte, Prince Napoléon (here with his sister Princess Caroline in front of their famous ancestor) would not be a great Prince of Sweden, Duke of Västergötland? At the same time such a consort would have added a new dimension to the Royal House, for sure knowing that one of Napoléon's best generals, Jean-Baptiste Bernadotte, Maréchal du Empire, became Sweden's first Bernadotte King.

All newspapers would have mentioned it. The Daily Mail would not have written "Crown Princess weds her trainer" but inform the (surprised) public that there still is a Napoléon walking around and that he has conquered the heart of Sweden's beautiful Crown Princess. It is just an example. I know that Daniel is a great dude but his greatness is the best proof that we can end the monarchy today, if you understand what I mean.
Reply With Quote
  #289  
Old 06-20-2015, 03:56 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,030
Republicans want to abolish monarchy regardless of who royals marry.
Kaiser Wilhelm was so class conscious he didn't allow Serene Highnesses to mingle with Royal Highnesses and it didn't help save his throne

I'll leave it to the people to decide when to end the monarchy. As it stands now I have no worries my country will be a monarchy for years to come.
Reply With Quote
  #290  
Old 06-20-2015, 04:03 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 1,662
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
The collapse of monarchies will come sooner than you think. And when one collapses, for an example in Sweden or Belgium, the others in Norway, the Netherlands, etc. will become very wobbly too.

When one country opened the Iron Curtain in 1989, soon the one after the other Communist regime collapsed. Who would ever have thought to see a unified Germany, to see all the former East Bloc being members of NATO and EU? Who would ever have thought the proud French giving up their Franc and the self-assured Germans their Deutschmark? It happened and sooner than anyone realized.

Who thought that a Kadhafi, a Mubarak, an Assad, etc.would all fall, one by one, just because in one North-African country (Tunisia) the people came on the street and revolted? Who could have foreseen or even imagined all what happened?

The same with the monarchies. When a modern West-European country decides that monarchy should be ended in a neat and peaceful way, it will work like domino-stones. Exactly like once a modern West-European country legalized same-gender marriages and it spread across Europe. Exactly like one monarchy started to make the succession absolute primogeniture and it spread across Europe. Exactly like Beatrix and even the Pope adbicated and suddenly the "taboo" on abdications in never-thought monarchies like Spain or Belgium was gone too.

With other words. Marrying for popularity but not looking to the fundamental principles of what monarchy and/or nobility means will lead to their downfall. You say, none seem on the verge of collapse. Indeed, but the examples I mentioned above showed how quick things can change.

I can assure you: du moment the Parliament in Sweden, with all gratitude and respect and with gentlemanlike and generous arrangements, decides to end the monarchy and makes Sweden a republic. (It can be any other monarchy anyway). You can be sure that in Brussels or in The Hague or in Madrid politicians will call for a "national debate" and "it is time for our country to adapt to modern time", etc. It is my strong conviction that all monarchies hang on a thin line. That thin line is the specialness of the institution, the attachment the people have to it, the uniqueness of the royal family. As all this has gone, the thin line becomes ultrathin and utmost vulnerable.

Anyway, every individual will have an own opinion on the matter. But be sure, like the amazing and unbelievable examples I have given (the collapse of the Iron Curtain, the German unification, the opening of all EU borders and the birth of a common currrency, the Arab Spring,) that the start always seemed a futile event with unforeseen consequences.
It is perfectly possible that one day the monarchy may be abolished in Belgium, or in Spain, or in Sweden. But I don't think that has anything to do with the kings or queens of those countries marrying commoners, nor do I think that their marrying nobles would reduce the likelihood of their countries becoming republics. In Belgium BTW, the current and former kings did not marry commoners. In that sense, I believe your argument is flawed as it considers a possible outcome (the abolition of the monarchy), but assigns it to a wrong cause (who the king or queen marries).

In any case, the downfall of the monarchy is, by all accounts, far from imminent in Sweden or even in Spain and Belgium, and much less so in Norway, DEnmark, Britain or the Netherlands. Throughout Europe, monarchies were historically abolished in the course or in the aftermath of major wars, authoritarian regimes, nationalist uprisings, and/or prolonged economic and social crisis. Small, wealthy countries like Denmark or the Netherlands do not fit that pattern and the incentive to change a system of government that works well and to which people are used is not really that significant. In Spain or in Belgium, on the other hand, if the monarchy falls, it will probably happen in connection with a breakup of the country.
Reply With Quote
  #291  
Old 06-20-2015, 07:04 PM
Al_bina's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: City, Kazakhstan
Posts: 6,948
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
Are the only scenarios of a royal marrying a commoner going wrong, Masako and maybe kinda sorta Mette Marit? Those are good numbers considering how many of these marriages have taken place. Isn't Princess Kiko also a commoner? She wouldn't be considered a disaster even before her son was born. I think the main point is that a successful royal isn't based on what family you were born into but on who you are as a person. Those with long pedigrees have been good and bad at their jobs, and those with no pedigree have been good and bad at their jobs.
The Japanese Imperial family avoids ladies with a questionable past (divorces, awkward photo shoots, lack of high education) in the family. Both daughters-in-law come from common respected families, have excellent education, and speak multiple languages. Unlike its European counterparts, the IHA did not embellish resumes.
Crown Prince Naruhito and Crown Princess Masako were under great pressure to produce a male heir. They failed to do so, and there was a backlash. I wonder how Queen Letizia, Queen Maxima, or Crown Princess Victoria would feel under such pressure.
__________________
"I never did mind about the little things"
Amanda, "Point of No Return"
Reply With Quote
  #292  
Old 06-20-2015, 07:07 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 6,308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
Daniel is doing a fine job so far but when anyone can do this, it is the best plea to end the circus. By the way, the popularity of the Swedish monarchy, despite all the happy events, is not that high, in comparison with some other monarchies.

And... who says that someone, eeeerhmmmm, let us say Jean-Christophe Bonaparte, Prince Napoléon (here with his sister Princess Caroline in front of their famous ancestor) would not be a great Prince of Sweden, Duke of Västergötland? At the same time such a consort would have added a new dimension to the Royal House, for sure knowing that one of Napoléon's best generals, Jean-Baptiste Bernadotte, Maréchal du Empire, became Sweden's first Bernadotte King.

All newspapers would have mentioned it. The Daily Mail would not have written "Crown Princess weds her trainer" but inform the (surprised) public that there still is a Napoléon walking around and that he has conquered the heart of Sweden's beautiful Crown Princess. It is just an example. I know that Daniel is a great dude but his greatness is the best proof that we can end the monarchy today, if you understand what I mean.
Prince Napoleon might have been required to embrace Lutheranism to marry Victoria(if he'd been so inclined) not to mention renounce his own illustrious name and take the Bernadotte name and Arms.

Nope...no way. In fact it would have all been considerably more complicated than the fantasy you have described.

Maybe Charlotte Casiraghi would have been perfect for him if he'd been her type. Aesthetically they would have been amazing, and reinforcing the existing Napoleonic ties to the House of Grimaldi would have been a bonanza for historians and those who are fascinated by tracing genealogy like myself.
__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena
Reply With Quote
  #293  
Old 06-20-2015, 07:15 PM
Muhler's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 8,539
Should the European monarchies fall, it will be predominantly for political reasons.
I cannot, even in my wildest dreams, imagine commoners marrying into the royal families would be a significant factor.
The behavior of the royals, yes. If the institution itself becomes too common, yes. Whom they marry, no way.
Reply With Quote
  #294  
Old 06-20-2015, 07:22 PM
Muhler's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 8,539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
Daniel is doing a fine job so far but when anyone can do this, it is the best plea to end the circus. By the way, the popularity of the Swedish monarchy, despite all the happy events, is not that high, in comparison with some other monarchies.

And... who says that someone, eeeerhmmmm, let us say Jean-Christophe Bonaparte, Prince Napoléon (here with his sister Princess Caroline in front of their famous ancestor) would not be a great Prince of Sweden, Duke of Västergötland? At the same time such a consort would have added a new dimension to the Royal House, for sure knowing that one of Napoléon's best generals, Jean-Baptiste Bernadotte, Maréchal du Empire, became Sweden's first Bernadotte King.

All newspapers would have mentioned it. The Daily Mail would not have written "Crown Princess weds her trainer" but inform the (surprised) public that there still is a Napoléon walking around and that he has conquered the heart of Sweden's beautiful Crown Princess. It is just an example. I know that Daniel is a great dude but his greatness is the best proof that we can end the monarchy today, if you understand what I mean.
Are you seriously telling us that Victoria marrying a noble rather than a commoner would improve the standing of the monarchy in Sweden of all places?!? Probably the most, almost obsessively, egalitarian country in the world.
Have you ever been to Sweden? Or talked with ordinary Swedes about this issue? I'm serious. Have you ever discussed this issue with the ordinary Gösta and Freja?

I can tell you that the reservations I have heard from ordinary Swedes is not based on them being commoners, but on their background (Sofia) and/or lack of qualifications (Sofia and Daniel).
Reply With Quote
  #295  
Old 06-20-2015, 07:37 PM
Queen Camilla's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,861
I do not see the difference between 'commoner' and nobility.

If the father is titled but the mother isn't why should the child be classified as nobility?

If the mother is titled but the father isn't why should the child be classified as commoner?

What makes a person a commoner? A member of the nobility?

If a titled man marries a commoner and his son marries a commoner and his son married a commoner and his son marries a commoner why should the sons and grandsons and greatgrandsons be consider noble.

The son has half or less noble blood, the grandson had one fourth or less noble blood and greatgrandson has one eight or less noble blood.

How does one decide if the person is a member of the nobility?

If a woman can trace her ancestry 1000 years with the majority being members of royalty but she is not consider noble because her mother married an untitled man yet a man is considered nobility if his grandfather received a title 50 years ago.

IMO, there is no difference between a 'commoner' and the 'nobility'. Almost all who married into the RF after the 1940s were/are a commoner.

It is just a case of sexism continuing into the 21st century.

As the saying goes mama's baby daddy's maybe.
The RF families knew this and that is why they had people in the bedroom making sure the marriages were consummated.
Reply With Quote
  #296  
Old 06-20-2015, 07:42 PM
Muhler's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 8,539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Camilla View Post
I do not see the difference between 'commoner' and nobility.

If the father is titled but the mother isn't why should the child be classified as nobility?

If the mother is titled but the father isn't why should the child be classified as commoner?

What makes a person a commoner? A member of the nobility?

If a titled man marries a commoner and his son marries a commoner and his son married a commoner and his son marries a commoner why should the sons and grandsons and greatgrandsons be consider noble.

The son has half or less noble blood, the grandson had one fourth or less noble blood and greatgrandson has one eight or less noble blood.
How does one decide if the person is a member of the nobility?

If a woman can trace her ancestry 1000 years with the majority being members of royalty but she is not consider noble because her mother married an untitled man yet a man is considered nobility if his grandfather received a title 50 years ago.

IMO, there is no difference between a 'commoner' and the 'nobilty'. Almost all who married into the RF after the 1940s is a commoner.
You are right. You don't.
It's who inherits the title that matters.

Also, in this day an age, the majority of nobles have ordinary jobs. A few own estates, even fewer have a serious fortune.
But the majority are indistinguishable from the commoners they live and work with.
Reply With Quote
  #297  
Old 06-20-2015, 07:48 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,030
In Britain individuals are ennobled not families. Lady Diana Spencer wasn't a noble (her father was) Even royals in Britain are commoners.

So anyone who is not the sovereign or the holder of a substantive peerage is a commoner in Britain.
Reply With Quote
  #298  
Old 06-20-2015, 07:59 PM
Muhler's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 8,539
Indeed.

Let's turn the question around.
If I for whatever reason is ennobled, say becoming a count. Am I suddenly more qualified to marry a royal? Or am I just pretending to be a noble?
What about my children? Are they more qualified than I am to marry a royal, as they will be second generation nobles? - There won't be much difference in their upbringing. They will still be taught the same values as now.
If they are not "noble enough", when are they?
When they are third or fifth generation nobles?
What if one of them, say my son, marry a commoner. Will that reduce their children to first generation nobles? Or will they become third generation nobles? Because they will still inherit my title as count of whatever.

Is my son (Who BTW I'm waiting to pick up. ) only to marry another noble before his children are noble enough to marry a royal?
Reply With Quote
  #299  
Old 06-20-2015, 08:56 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 1,662
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Camilla View Post
I do not see the difference between 'commoner' and nobility.

If the father is titled but the mother isn't why should the child be classified as nobility?

If the mother is titled but the father isn't why should the child be classified as commoner?

What makes a person a commoner? A member of the nobility?
Good questions. Basically, in those countries where nobility has official recognition, the law clearly defines who is noble and who is not.

In the UK, strictly speaking there is no such thing as a "nobility", but rather a "peerage", i.e the set of all individuals who bear the titles of duke, marquess, earl, viscount, or baron and who, until 1999, were entitled to sit and vote in the House of Lords. With a few exceptions, these titles are normally inherited only in male line by the first-born son. Wives and daughters of a peer, as well as their sons (including the firstborn before he inherits the title) may use courtesy titles or honorific predicates, but, strictly speaking, they are "commoners" in the sense that they could, already before 1999 vote and stand as candidates in elections to the House of Commons. In the broader sense and in common usage though, people normally identify the immediate family of a peer (for example, an earl's daughter like Lady Diana Spencer) as "nobility".

In continental Europe, on the other hand, the concept of "nobility" in somewhat different. In the Netherlands, for example, there are 3 main categories of "nobility": (1) individuals from native Dutch families who were ennobled by a sovereign (e.g. the Holy German Emperor or the French King) prior to the creation of the Kingdom of the Netherlands and whose nobility status was recognized by a Dutch monarch; (2) individuals who belong to the nobility of another country and were incorporated into the nobility of the Netherlands by a Dutch monarch; and (3) individuals who were elevated to the nobility of the Netherlands by a Dutch monarch. In all cases, nobility may come with a title (in the Netherlands, usually baron or, more rarely, count) or not (there is something then called "untitled nobility" . e.g. a jonkheer or jonkvrouw). In the case of recognized (and sometimes also incorporated) nobility, the nobility status , including titles like count or baron, normally extends from birth to all male and female descendants of a family, but only in male line, meaning that fathers can transmit nobility (and titles if any) to all their sons and daughters, but mothers do not transmit nobility to any of their children. In the case of elevated nobility, many times titles are transmitted only to the first-born son (or the "head of the family"), but other descendants in male line remain "untitled nobility".

In Scandinavia, the Kingdom of Norway doesn't have a nobility (just a royal family). In Denmark, the nobility is still legally recognized and, in Sweden, it ceased to be officially recognized in 2003 (?), but individuals who belong to the nobility may still use their titles. From what I understand, Sweden was similar to the Netherlands in the sense that there were titled nobles (counts and barons) and untitled nobility. Moreover, the old nobility from the pre-Bernadotte era (i.e. dating prior to 1810) is also inheritable by all male and female descendants in the family, but again only in male line,whereas the new titles of nobility created after 1810 are normally inherited by the first-born son only.

Spain, on the other hand, seems to have a system also similar to the UK. There are ranking titles of nobility like duke, marquis, count, viscount, etc. inheritable by the firstborn, except that in Spain, daughters can now also inherit titles if they are the first child (or, at least, I believe they can, but I'm not very knowledgeable about Spanish rules). Then there is a separate, special status of "grandee" of Spain, which can be awarded by the king to a noble person, e.g. a duke or a marquis, but can also be awarded to an untitled individual.
Reply With Quote
  #300  
Old 06-20-2015, 11:49 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,808
I is all nonsense. If they didn't marry "Commoners" many would stay single forever. The big German marrying farms no longer count. So, you marry who you love and can. In defense of marry during Queen Victoria's times, she still felt you should marry for "love".
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Marriage to Commoners in Denmark Maura724 Royal House of Denmark 16 06-12-2016 09:46 AM
What royals & nobles are in the ever discreet Haute Couture Club? CasiraghiTrio Royal Style File 57 12-26-2010 10:03 AM
Marriage between Royals and Commoners. Part 1: Current Rulers Ennyllorac Picture of the Month, Special Features, Blogs and Articles 12 11-11-2008 01:43 PM




Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best hat best outfit british calendar 2016 catherine middleton style coup d'etat courtship crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit current events current events thread danish royal family duchess of cambridge fashion poll felipe vi general news grand duke jean greece infanta elena outfit kate middleton king abdullah ii king abdullah ii current events king felipe king felipe and queen letizia king felipe vi king philippe king willem-alexander magna charta member introduction mohammed reza national day norwegian royals opening of parliament picture of the week prince bernhard princess alexandra princess madeleine princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats princess sofia maternity wear princess sofia pregnancy style queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen mathilde queen mathildes style queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania royal royal fashion sonja state visit state visit from mexico sweden the duchess of cambridge the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge eveningwear the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002-2012 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:36 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises