The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > Prince Harry and Prince William

Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1321  
Old 10-07-2008, 01:42 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,894
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarrie View Post
I would like to pose one question: all these crown princesses hailing from modest backgrounds are giving the impression that anyone can now be a crown princess. In my opinion this weakens the royal families as in a couple of years time there won't be a drop of blue blood left in any of the royal families of europe. So if for example christian (fred & mary's son) marries a commoner, their offspring wouldn't be a royal at all. Where will that leave us?? I don't think that citizens would like that commoners saying they are 'royals' live the good life at the expense of the taxpayer even less that they like it now. I think that royal families should reconsider their marraiges now before it's too late.
We have an upcoming article that Vanesa has written for the TRF articles site which makes pretty much this exact argument. We're hoping to publish it sometime in the next couple of weeks. It seems to be quite topical, because I'm seeing these concerns being expressed in several forums.
__________________

  #1322  
Old 10-07-2008, 02:22 PM
Menarue's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Cascais, Portugal
Posts: 2,155
I am looking forward to reading it Elspeth.... I believe it is a real concern for people who would like monarchies to continue.
__________________

  #1323  
Old 10-07-2008, 02:48 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,004
Why? Perhaps there's something I don't understand.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Menarue View Post
I believe it is a real concern for people who would like monarchies to continue.
  #1324  
Old 10-07-2008, 02:55 PM
Menarue's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Cascais, Portugal
Posts: 2,155
When the article comes out I am sure you will see what is being talked about.
  #1325  
Old 10-07-2008, 05:43 PM
Odette's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tampa, United States
Posts: 2,481
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarrie View Post
I would like to pose one question: all these crown princesses hailing from modest backgrounds are giving the impression that anyone can now be a crown princess. In my opinion this weakens the royal families as in a couple of years time there won't be a drop of blue blood left in any of the royal families of europe. So if for example christian (fred & mary's son) marries a commoner, their offspring wouldn't be a royal at all. Where will that leave us?? I don't think that citizens would like that commoners saying they are 'royals' live the good life at the expense of the taxpayer even less that they like it now. I think that royal families should reconsider their marraiges now before it's too late.
Sarrie, for starters look up to Norway where the current Queen is a commoner and her children have married commoners......this is the way all Royal families are heading...........
BTW I just received the November Vanity Fair and read the entire article about Kate Middleton. It was quite complimentary to her. No new information whatsoever and very little mention on P William. Seemed like a testimonial to her strengths and tact.
  #1326  
Old 10-07-2008, 05:47 PM
Odette's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tampa, United States
Posts: 2,481
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menarue View Post
I am looking forward to reading it Elspeth.... I believe it is a real concern for people who would like monarchies to continue.

I am also dying to read this. At one point I had devoted a whole wall where I had blue threads and red threads and how they connected with each marriage to a commoner and the colour changing to pink as each generation was more and more marrying outside the "Blue Blood" pool. I feel that at this rate there will be no blue bloods in another 2 generations reigning on any royal house in Europe.
  #1327  
Old 10-07-2008, 06:28 PM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Odette View Post
I am also dying to read this. At one point I had devoted a whole wall where I had blue threads and red threads and how they connected with each marriage to a commoner and the colour changing to pink as each generation was more and more marrying outside the "Blue Blood" pool. I feel that at this rate there will be no blue bloods in another 2 generations reigning on any royal house in Europe.
One should really see that in historical perspection. The idea or the superiority of "Blue Blood" has, at least in Europe, evolved according to political necessities. In times beforeand during the Baroque/Absolutism is was believed that it needed only the male parent to be a Royal for the child to be a Royal. That changed when the idea of female inheritance came up. Now it is enough to have one reigning parent to be a full-fledged Royal. So if we discuss this in historical context, then the Royal partner in that marriage enobles his child through his sperm/ovum to Royality, no matter where the other partner came from as long as the marriage is legitimate (another historical term!) or as long as the fatherhood is accepted. That's why eg. the illegitimate daughter of Louis XiV. was considered equal to his right Royal nephew the duke de Chartres - her blood was as Royal as his, only the marriage of her parents was missing - so the right catholic mother of the groom got a fit of the vapours while all others accepted this marriage as okay (which over the centuries led to the Orleans-claimant to the French throne of today....)

So discussing this topic in historical terms, it is no problem that the Crown Princes did not marry princesses because it's their heritage that makes the child a Royal. And if you don't subscribe to that idea, you're not a real monarchist, I'M afraid (historically speaking, of course...)
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
  #1328  
Old 10-07-2008, 07:00 PM
kimebear's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Albany, United States
Posts: 1,382
I have to agree with Jo on this. Especially when you consider how well the current formerly commoner Crown Princesses are doing in their jobs. In this day and age, it seems strange to advocate for strictly dynastic marriages just to preserve already thinning blood lines.

A marriage between blue bloods will do nothing to preserve the monarchies if the couple are not wildly in love. How many more Wars of the Waleses do you think the Britsh monarchy can stand? With a limited number of royal candidates, would the chances of finding a true life mate not be much better if picked from the overall population?
  #1329  
Old 10-07-2008, 09:24 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
I find this discussion about the importance of "blue blood" and how it is being diluted to the detriment of the monarchy/ies very interesting. Royal blood is no different from the blood of other people.

If you look back over the past thousand years or so, it is clear that the "blue blooded" families, royalty included, only got where they are because they could put together bigger armies or had more wealth (two factors which were usually connected), and could kill more of their opposing armies and take their land, and the families that went with the land, and animals, and jewels.

Success in the military was one common way for men to improve the colour of their blood, for it often received Royal favour, and honours and the land and opportunities that went with them. Men from relatively humble backgrounds could rise to great things and titles after a stint in the army or navy.

The family history of Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington, provides a useful example. His family can be traced back to one of the Norman invaders, who was given land in reward for his services. Was that Norman soldier's blood any bluer than that of the Saxons they conquered? I think not.

The 1st Duke of Wellington was himself born The Honourable Arthur Wesley (sic.), fourth son of the 1st Earl of Mornington. He chose the army as a career, and was very good at what he did, for he progressed to be created firstly Earl, later Marquess, and finally, Duke of Wellington. Was his blood better than that of less successful military men? I think not.

Wellesley obviously had intelligence and talent, and am inclined to attribute his particular achievements to those factors rather than to anything his ancestors might have done. If his blood was blue, he made it so.
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
  #1330  
Old 10-07-2008, 09:54 PM
avrilo's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mexico city, Mexico
Posts: 680
Can you please explain further. I don't see the point of your post... plus, well it has been scientifcally proven that all humans royals or not we all have red blood.... none has blue blood :P.
  #1331  
Old 10-07-2008, 11:43 PM
Ella Kay's Avatar
Courtier
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Anywhere, United States
Posts: 953
I agree with your premise, Roslyn; I don't believe that any human is born more inherently special than any other. I'm less concerned with the "blueness" of a person's blood and more concerned with his or her ability to function effectively as a leader or a representative of his or her country. That's one reason I'm not bothered by William's choice of Kate, a commoner, as a girlfriend. I'd wager that William's not too concerned about the blueness of his partner's blood either, judging by his current choice of girlfriend.
__________________

"I have to be seen to be believed."
HM The Queen
  #1332  
Old 10-08-2008, 12:08 AM
Odette's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tampa, United States
Posts: 2,481
I suppose we can all agree that we see things at a different angle. There is no doubt that monarchy lasted all these centuries (regardless of their origins) because of an unbroken chain of direct lines. The term "blue blood" does not refer of course on the colour of the blood in their veins.
The marriages with commoners may have produced some happy couples and some divorces and they are no different than those alliances made for political and other considerations. This is not the point. The point is the lowering of the "standards" in terms of provenance.
Prince Haakon for example has a commoner for a mother and wife. His children have titles and Ingrid may be the next Queen of Norway but the bloodline is no longer royal. They may be wildly happy and the ladies may do a fantastic job but this does not make them royal.
  #1333  
Old 10-08-2008, 12:59 AM
Ella Kay's Avatar
Courtier
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Anywhere, United States
Posts: 953
But even that argument, about heritage making someone "royal," is complicated in Norway, because Crown Prince Haakon's ancestors were elected to that country's throne. Monarchy is a whole new business in the modern era in some ways.
__________________

"I have to be seen to be believed."
HM The Queen
  #1334  
Old 10-08-2008, 01:14 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
Diana was the most aristocratic woman to marry into the royal family in centuries....a Spencer and descendant of The Dukes of Sutherland and Marlborough, not to mention a royal Stuart bloodline. Her maternal grandmother was Lady Fermoy, a close friend and Woman of the Bedchamber to The Queen Mother for forty years. Hardly a commoner at the same level as someone like Sophie Wessex or a Kate Middleton. Even Sarah Ferguson is more blue-blooded than Kate Middleton could ever hope to be.

Whether William will actually marry her is another matter altogether. Being The Prince of Wales and future King carries a heavy burden for his wife. Given the horrendous mistakes made by his father, you can be sure The Queen will not be rushed into giving approval either.
  #1335  
Old 10-08-2008, 01:19 AM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by avrilo View Post
Can you please explain further. I don't see the point of your post... plus, well it has been scientifcally proven that all humans royals or not we all have red blood.... none has blue blood :P.
Sorry to have not made myself clear. It made perfect sense to me.

I have previously said here that I believe a person's suitability for a particular job, in particular the wife of a future king, depends on their qualities as an individual.

It has been suggested that the institution of monarchy will suffer by royals marrying commoners.

My point, perhaps not clearly expressed, was that it should not be forgotten how Royals and nobles got to be Royals and nobles. They only occupy that position in society because of an ancestor's success at some activity, primarily soldiering, which led to either the person becoming a monarch (Wiliam the Conquerer) or receiving favours from the monarch which increased the blueness of their blood, such as an earldom or a dukedom, e.g. Wellesley.

The current members of those families are not intrinsically more intelligent than the rest of us or in any way more worthy, though some of them might like to think they are.

The Monarchy's primary role these days is to entertain the people. They don't actually have to make any important decisions any more; we elect people to do that and the Monarch does what she/he is advised. All the Royals have to do is fulfil what are primarily PR duties. The Monarchy needs to connect with the people, and be seen to be relevant. I think it can be just as relevant if a suitable middle class girl marries William as it can if the daughter of an aristocrat marries him. Whoever it is, she will become a princess the day she marries him. Her popularity will depend on her qualities as an individual, not who her ancestors were.

And if the time has come that the institution of the Monarchy really is so insecure that its continued existence is threatened by the mere fact of "commoners" marrying into it, perhaps it's high time it went.
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
  #1336  
Old 10-08-2008, 03:07 AM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Odette View Post
Prince Haakon for example has a commoner for a mother and wife. His children have titles and Ingrid may be the next Queen of Norway but the bloodline is no longer royal. They may be wildly happy and the ladies may do a fantastic job but this does not make them royal.
Odette, I think you misunderstand the system. It may be that in your opinion Ingrid is not Royal but the only opinion that counts is the opinion of the souverain of Norway and of the other crowned heads who have to acknowledge this girl as a Royal. And believe me, they all do!
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
  #1337  
Old 10-08-2008, 03:33 AM
Menarue's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Cascais, Portugal
Posts: 2,155
Roslyn of course no person is better than another there is no need to even mention it. That doesn´t mean that you can say I am just as good as Queen Elizabeth move over because your most remote ancestor wielded a spear and was cleverer than others.....so that doesn´t give you any more right to rule than it would me.
Norway is not a good example the Nordic people have always been more liberal thinking than the Brtiish, that is also not the point.
Where you have a monarchy that has lasted as long as the British has there are traditionalists that would prefer this to go on. If everyone wants a Republic then perhaps they will get it but I would like you to go to an interesting post in the Portuguese thread that points out that nearly all the American Presidents are descended from Edward II of England, and that includes Washington, Ronald Reagan,
Roosevelt and Bill Clinton. In fact there are only a handful that don´t descend from him. Look them up.
Also, Lady Fermoy is not a good example, she was not blue-blooded she married the 4th Baron Fermoy, her style of "lady" derived from her marriage.
The suitability for a job is the person´s qualifications I agree.
If you consider being Queen Consort of Britain is a "job" people can start sending in their cvs.
I think this all equal and going back 1,000 years and saying the originator of a family was.... etc etc. The point is not what they were a 1,000 years ago but the actual "1,000" years that they have lasted and in the case of the Kings of England it is well over this.
  #1338  
Old 10-08-2008, 06:02 AM
muriel's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menarue View Post
You have asked me before and I will answer again, get on with her life instead of what seems to be mooning around waiting for a proposal that perhaps will never come. She is a young attractive girl and perhaps she has aimed too high. What should she do? This is the second time on this same post. Get on with her life she is not royalty yet.
I don´t want her to move into Clarence House.... Heaven forbid. I can´t see what is lively about this chat. You are inventing an engagement, making her a suitable bride for royalty etc etc. I would like you to tell me what makes her a suitable future Queen of England? Dignity, good manners, what?
As I have said I have nothing against the girl, she is an attractive young lady from a middle class family but I don´t think she is Queen of England material....
Now what is the lively chat you want? I am not going to change my mind about her suitability so if you want to turn this into a Kate monologue it is up to you.
I have absolutley no intentions of "turning this into a Kate monologue" but I do think you are continually ignoring the points being made, but before I say my last on this for now, I thought I might make some points raised in your last post:

1) You say you don't want Kate to move into CH, yet you go on repeating that she has not had the sign of commitment that Sophie had received, by being given her own apartment at BP - even though others on the forums have pointed out that Sophie did not live full time at BP before they were married!

2) "You are inventing an engagement, making her a suitable bride for royalty etc etc." - I am not sure how you worked all that out. I don't think I have ever mentioned that they are engaged or should get engaged (entirely their decision!) or whether she is a suitable bride for William. All I have consistently said is that your criticisms of her, in my opinion, are not with basis. If one is willing to criticise, I think one should be willing to provide a suitable alternative course of action. Are you sure you don't work for the DM?
  #1339  
Old 10-08-2008, 06:34 AM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menarue View Post
I think this all equal and going back 1,000 years and saying the originator of a family was.... etc etc. The point is not what they were a 1,000 years ago but the actual "1,000" years that they have lasted and in the case of the Kings of England it is well over this.
The House of Oldenburg in his different branches is the oldest ruling dynasty of Europe. Margrethe, queen of Denmark (of the House of Oldenburg) has accepted Mary Donaldson as a daughter-in-law. Olav, king of Norway (of the House of Oldenburg) has accepted Sonja Haraldson as his daughter-in-law. Sofia, queen of Spain (of the House of Oldenburg) has accepted Letizia Ortiz as her daughter-in-law. Constantine and Anne Marie, ex-king and ex-queen of Greece (both of the House of Oldenburg) have accepted Marie-Chantal Miller as their daughter-in-law. So why should Charles, future king of the UK (of the House of Oldenburg) not accept Catherine Middleton as his daughter-in-law?
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
  #1340  
Old 10-08-2008, 06:53 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Valletta, Malta
Posts: 38
Regarding the comment posted earlier :
Sarrie, for starters look up to Norway where the current Queen is a commoner and her children have married commoners......this is the way all Royal families are heading...........


Yes I agree in Norway the current queen who is a commoner is very much looked up to and admired. This applies even to her children. However I think that when it's Ingrid Alexandra's to rule and get married (probably to a commoner as well) much of the special aura which have surrounded the royal families up till now would have pretty much evaporated. This would mean that the arguments which up till now have been used to retain the royal families will not remain valid. That is, they are kept as a token of tradition but if tradition is done away with then anybody from norway could becom the head of state, a role which is not administrative and thus it would be inevitable that people would start asking for a republic.

For the 'blue blood' discussion, it shouldn't be taken as a literal sense. Blue blood means of distinguished discent. Now if for example as will probably happen in Sweden in the case of Crown Princess Victoria's children your grandmother was a translator, your father owns a gym and you marry a commoner then that would put you on a social standing equal to someone coming from a very rich family or upper middle class.
__________________

Closed Thread

Tags
engagement, kate middleton, prince william, relationships, speculation, tabloid press


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
William and Kate: engagement and relationship rumours and musings 2009 Warren Prince Harry and Prince William 2017 01-01-2010 11:18 AM




Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit best outfit 2016 catherine middleton style countess of wessex coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events dom duarte duchess of cambridge e-mail fashion poll felipe vi grand duchess josephine-charlotte grand duke jean greece kate middleton king abdullah ii king carl gustaf's birthday king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander member introduction monarchy new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week prince bernhard prince charles princess madeleine princess marie princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen mathildes outfits queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania royal fashion september 2016 state visit state visit to denmark succession sweden the duchess of cambridge the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion 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- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:14 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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