The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   Royalty Past, Present, and Future (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f164/)
-   -   Marriages between royalty and nobility (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f164/marriages-between-royalty-and-nobility-23365.html)

Alastair_r 07-11-2009 02:59 PM

Marriages between royalty and nobility
 
Has anyone noticed that the main royals seem to be marrying people without titles but most minor royals are still marrying aristocrats . Does anyone know any reason why ?

MAfan 07-11-2009 03:03 PM

I don't know the reason of this fact, but I really like it; now it seems to be impossible a marriage between two "main royals", as you call them, so I guess this is a n excellent thing. I'm a nostalgic of the good old royal-royal marriages...

jonnydep 07-11-2009 03:34 PM

a little puzzled
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Alastair_r (Post 965235)
Has anyone noticed that the main royals seem to be marrying people without titles but most minor royals are still marrying aristocrats . Does anyone know any reason why ?

i am very sorry, your question is a very interesting one, but are you forgetting that diana, princess of wales was a daughter of a earl and sarah, duchess of yorks grandmother was a montagu douglas scott, a cousin of the duke of buccleuch, both the prince of wales and the duke of york arnt exactly minor royals !!! .
thus i can not see where you are coming from with your question.
regards jonny :flowers:

Alastair_r 07-11-2009 03:42 PM

But most of the major royals who have married in the last couple of years all married commoners . Most of the European princesses are not blue blooded. Where as a lot of French and German Princes seem to be marrying titled women

Lumutqueen 07-11-2009 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alastair_r (Post 965250)
But most of the major royals who have married in the last couple of years all married commoners . Most of the European princesses are not blue blooded. Where as a lot of French and German Princes seem to be marrying titled women

Princess Mathilde was a blue-blood.
But I understand what you are saying, I think it is a very good thing that the royals are mingling for want of a better word.
Main Royals don't tend to marry each other anymore but I do wish they would one day. :flowers:

EmpressRouge 07-11-2009 04:37 PM

Perhaps, non-reigning houses never bothered to change their old marriage laws. In order for the heir to inherit the titles, head of house-ship, and fortune, they have to old marriage laws, so they have to search for royal or noble brides. For example, Hereditary Prince Gustav of Sayn-Wittgenstein-Berleburg, son of Princess Benedikte of Denmark, cannot inherit his titles if he marries Carina Axelsson because of the stipulations of his paternal grandfather's will. Prince Pedro Luis of Orleans-Braganza was said to be looking for a potential royal/noble wife for the future before his untimely death last month in accordance with dynastic law. Now it looks like his younger brother Rafael will have to do that eventually.

On the other hand, reigning dynasties, in order to be more revelant in modern society and closer to the people, have allowed for marriages to commoners. Also, many of these reigning families, their marriages and succession rules are based on constitutional approval (e.g. the Netherlands) rather than dynastic law.

IslandDweller 07-13-2009 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EmpressRouge (Post 965269)
On the other hand, reigning dynasties, in order to be more revelant in modern society and closer to the people, have allowed for marriages to commoners.

I agree that it's more in the interest of royals who still have taxpayers to please to be especially progressive in the marriages they allow. Mary Donaldson's media friendliness seems to be making her a very successful modern royal, even if it's not a very aristocratic quality.

We can only speculate as to why it's the deposed royals who seem more likely to keep the blood blue. My theory is that it's a mixture of things. The Brazilian prince who died so tragically on May 31st was depicted in news coverage as being especially eager to preserve his royal identity. I think it's natural that those who are princes and princesses by tradition and not by law might be especially tenacious about maintaining their families' royal heritages. I can see why reigning royals, on the other hand, might draw comfort from taking red-blooded spouses who make them feel less cut off from the human race. An interview Crown Prince Frederik gave in 2001 (a couple of years before he became engaged to Mary) gave me the impression that he liked the idea of marrying a commoner.

fearghas 07-15-2009 07:35 AM

A thoery that I have is that the dethroning of the various European Royals. (German, French, Italian etc) has meant that the families haven't had to evolve so much with society. The reigning monarchs ahve had to change to keep their place but the others haven't. But don't be misled about the strictness of things now. Sure many of them are marrying titled women, but those women are no longer of royal blood.
For instance, Prince Manual of Bavaria was the first Prince to marry a Princess in two generations.
None of the latest generation of French Princes have married Princesss, the heir Prince Jean hasn't even married a titled woman.
About half of the Habsburgs haven't married Princesss, several have married non europeans. I think Georg Friedrich of Prussia will marry a Princess otherwise he will have a lot of strife from his uncles. It's possible that the Duke of Wurttemberg is preparing for his grandsons to eventually marry non royals
Much as I would like to see royal/royal marriages occur I think it will become even rarer in the future for them to marry even non royal titled women.

madeleine victoria 08-02-2009 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EmpressRouge (Post 965269)
Perhaps, non-reigning houses never bothered to change their old marriage laws. In order for the heir to inherit the titles, head of house-ship, and fortune, they have to old marriage laws, so they have to search for royal or noble brides. For example, Hereditary Prince Gustav of Sayn-Wittgenstein-Berleburg, son of Princess Benedikte of Denmark, cannot inherit his titles if he marries Carina Axelsson because of the stipulations of his paternal grandfather's will. Prince Pedro Luis of Orleans-Braganza was said to be looking for a potential royal/noble wife for the future before his untimely death last month in accordance with dynastic law. Now it looks like his younger brother Rafael will have to do that eventually.

On the other hand, reigning dynasties, in order to be more revelant in modern society and closer to the people, have allowed for marriages to commoners. Also, many of these reigning families, their marriages and succession rules are based on constitutional approval (e.g. the Netherlands) rather than dynastic law.

I agree. Non-reigning royals as much as they want to preserve their status are more recognized now by marrying titled princesses whereas reigning royals have to adapt to change in order to be accepted by their people. They have difficult situation in the sense that by marrying commoners they seem to get a lot closer to their people because he's marrying one of them.

auntie 08-08-2009 06:39 PM

I have mentioned it in a couple of posts b4, I definitly agree that nobility, aristocracy, peerage or minor/nonreigning royals tend to want to "hitch" up with people of their own status or more to preserve what is today so delicate. A HRH or daughter of a king will never have to prove their status as they will always stay this way no matter who they marry. Yet Lord so and so, or the hounorable whatsitsname, or a prince of von whatever really holds onto his title (and money if it exists) with a thread of hair, so at least with marriage, it is important for them to unite with someone who is somewhat their equal. I find it esp. true for the French or German non reigning royalty, even if they don't marry their equal, they definitely marry someone from a upper class background.

SpeedDial 08-31-2009 02:19 PM

I think there's absolutely nothing wrong with royalty marrying commoners. It's hard enough for us "regular" people without restrictions to find love in this world, so expecting royalty to marry only royalty limits their choices to pratically nothing. People should marry for love. Period.

Guido 09-16-2009 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EmpressRouge (Post 965269)
Perhaps, non-reigning houses never bothered to change their old marriage laws. In order for the heir to inherit the titles, head of house-ship, and fortune, they have to old marriage laws, so they have to search for royal or noble brides. For example, Hereditary Prince Gustav of Sayn-Wittgenstein-Berleburg, son of Princess Benedikte of Denmark, cannot inherit his titles if he marries Carina Axelsson because of the stipulations of his paternal grandfather's will. Prince Pedro Luis of Orleans-Braganza was said to be looking for a potential royal/noble wife for the future before his untimely death last month in accordance with dynastic law. Now it looks like his younger brother Rafael will have to do that eventually.

On the other hand, reigning dynasties, in order to be more revelant in modern society and closer to the people, have allowed for marriages to commoners. Also, many of these reigning families, their marriages and succession rules are based on constitutional approval (e.g. the Netherlands) rather than dynastic law.


Very good point of view. This is the reason why Gustav will never able to marry Carina Axelsson.

Beatitudo 09-17-2009 12:50 PM

Some non-reigning houses change their rules, for example the Wittelsbach.

Rascal 09-18-2009 08:17 AM

"Settling"
 
Two questions:

Haven't many of the non-reigning houses already relaxed the traditional standards a great deal to create more opportunities for "equal" marriages? I'm not sure which houses but I know that there has been some discussion somewhere that many of the current or just previous generation of marriages would not have made the cut 100 years ago.

Secondly, with this elitist or discriminating standard among the non-reigning or lesser royal houses, how do their members view the reigning houses? Many of them are invited to and attend some of the more publicized events (weddings, birthdays, anniversaries, etc.) of the reigning houses, but do they - publicly or privately - look down upon or criticize the current reigning crown princely couples or royal consorts like Queen Silvia and Grand Duchess Maria Teresa?

Thanks for any responses.

Rascal

lucien 09-18-2009 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guido (Post 992304)
Very good point of view. This is the reason why Gustav will never able to marry Carina Axelsson.

Oh but he will,don't worry,he will.He doesn't put up with his ancestors nonsense on the issue of marrying ebenbürtig,and if he takes it to the European Court of Human Rights,then the old adagio is out of the window once and for all.And thank heaven for that,that really was the most austere and weltfremd demand.It would do at the time maybe,but not in this day and age,not anymore.

Guido 09-19-2009 05:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lucien (Post 993181)
Oh but he will,don't worry,he will.He doesn't put up with his ancestors nonsense on the issue of marrying ebenbürtig,and if he takes it to the European Court of Human Rights,then the old adagio is out of the window once and for all.And thank heaven for that,that really was the most austere and weltfremd demand.It would do at the time maybe,but not in this day and age,not anymore.


I wouldn't be so sure. Gustav will be able to marry her at any time without any court cases, if he is ready to sign away his inheritance rights.

Hereditary Thane 10-13-2009 04:07 AM

The more restricting the dynastic house laws (they are not judicial laws but stipulations that no court or church would sanction) the more ridiculous the family appears. British and Irish dynastic families have always chosen their spouses from a wide gene and social pool. So called equal marriage is a Germanic conception. Look at the marriage patterns of those royal houses that are in full vigour - they are not the ones that adhere to outmoded ideas.

MelinaB. 10-13-2009 01:51 PM

About many "main royals" marrying commoners:the question is how far will that go.For example,Victoria's and Daniel's children will have 1/4 royal blood.So,what will happen in the next generation? ;)

Lumutqueen 10-13-2009 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MelinaB. (Post 1004254)
About many "main royals" marrying commoners:the question is how far will that go.For example,Victoria's and Daniel's children will have 1/4 royal blood.So,what will happen in the next generation? ;)

You can't really go by that, if you go back far enough in royal families there will be generations that had no inherit royal blood, just royal titles.
The way they use the titles is what counts, not the fact that they are only 1/4 royal. :smile:

MelinaB. 10-13-2009 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lumutqueen (Post 1004263)
You can't really go by that, if you go back far enough in royal families there will be generations that had no inherit royal blood, just royal titles.
The way they use the titles is what counts, not the fact that they are only 1/4 royal. :smile:

I understand your point and you're right.But then,why dividing people into royals and commoners(in the future,I mean)? :flowers:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:00 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises