English and British Royal Marriages


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I'm intrigued by this idea of a separate monarch for Scotland if the Scots/Scotch/Scottish people completely devolve from the UK. Perhaps the line of James II/VII would be invited back to the throne? It's only the English parliament that bars Catholics from the throne.
Who is the current pretender to the throne (as descended from James)?
 
Nationalism is alive and well! What if Scotland, which I believe has its own Parliament, breaks away from the United Kingdom and needs its own ruler-- maybe it can be Prince Andrew once the Queen dies and then the throne will pass down through his line.
I really can't see Scotland accepting Andrew as their King, even though he is the Earl of Inverness, I can count on one hand the amount of times he has traveled up to the capitol of the Highlands. He has no private home in Scotland and seems to show no interest in the Scots, unlike his brother Charles, who is well thought of, even by the SNP leader Salmond, by all accounts.:flowers:
 
:previous:

I did not realize Prince Andrew was not fond of Scotland. I thought the entire Royal Family enjoyed their summer vacations in Balmoral. Some day I hope to visit Scotland.
 
Charles didn't have a private home in Scotland until his grandmother died and left him the Castle of Mey.
I can't see the Scots going for Franz of Bavaria at all!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There is Scotland's association with golf. :lol:

I'd like to visit Scotland someday as well. I expect that there are any number of people there who look like me, because I'd have many, many distant relatives there.:)

:previous:

I did not realize Prince Andrew was not fond of Scotland. I thought the entire Royal Family enjoyed their summer vacations in Balmoral. Some day I hope to visit Scotland.
 
Charles didn't have a private home in Scotland until his grandmother died and left him the Castle of Mey.
I can't see the Scots going for Franz of Bavaria at all!
He didn't but frequently stayed in Scotland, especially at Balmoral. Most Scots wouldn't know who Franz of Bavaria was.
 
I'd bet most Bavarians wouldn't know who Franz is either! If there's an eligible woman in the Bavarian line and she was flexible on the whole religion thing, then if William or Harry married into that line, it would make a nice, complete circle, wouldn't it?
 
:previous:
It's too late. The Jacobite line of succession has already moved on. Duke Franz is unmarried; his heir is his brother Max Emanuel, Duke in Bavaria; followed by Max's daughter Hereditary Princess Sophie of Liechtenstein and her son Prince Josef Wenzel.
 
:previous:

I did not realize Prince Andrew was not fond of Scotland. I thought the entire Royal Family enjoyed their summer vacations in Balmoral. Some day I hope to visit Scotland.
With the availablity of Balmoral, plus the family 'required' holiday there, I can see why Andrew wouldn't find it necessary to purchase a house of his own in Scotland.
 
:previous:
I don't think there is a requirement to holiday at Balmoral, nor do I think Andrew has been there in a while!

If anyone other than Charles, I think the Scots would support Anne, who demonstrates her support for Scotland on a regular basis!:D
 
With the availablity of Balmoral, plus the family 'required' holiday there, I can see why Andrew wouldn't find it necessary to purchase a house of his own in Scotland.

I don't think the family holliday is required. Not many members of the royal family choose to go up their for summer. I agree that andrew doesn't like scotland, probably too rural. :)
 
:previous:
I don't think there is a requirement to holiday at Balmoral, nor do I think Andrew has been there in a while!

If anyone other than Charles, I think the Scots would support Anne, who demonstrates her support for Scotland on a regular basis!:D


At some time I seem to remember reading (although I could very well be wrong) that there was some decision made that Anne would become the Queen's main child involved in Scotland and Charles obviously in Wales leaving Andrew and Edward with no special area but general support for the Queen and the government of the day.

This doesn't mean that Anne and Charles are restricted to those areas of course just that if something comes up that needs or wants a royal personage involvement (other than the Queen herself of course) that Anne would be the person to get the Scottish role e.g. she is connected to the Scottish Rugby board for instance whereas Charles and/or sons will get that role in Wales/Cornwall.

Of course I may have dreamt the whole thing.:flowers:
 
I don't think Anne supports the Scottish Rugby out of a sense of duty, you may be right on the division of labour, although I don't remember seeing anything.:)
 
Different topics

I am reading through this blog and I see a number of different topics, so I will list some random thoughts:

(1) Prince Josef Wenzel (age 14) is eventually the heir to the throne of Liechtenstein, and the Jacobite succession. Joseph Wenzel's birth generated some excitement in Jacobite circles. Firstly, having been born at Portland Hospital in London, he is the first Jacobite heir born in Great Britain since James Stuart in 1688. Secondly, barring unforeseen circumstances, Joseph Wenzel will eventually become a Head of State, a position not held by a Stuart pretender since Victor Emmanuel I ruled Sardinia. Should Scotland ever want their own king, he is a good candidate, but it would have to be in a personal union with Liechtenstein,

(2) :britflag:Anne of Hyde (married 1660) was the last spouse of a king born in Britain to marry an heir presumptive or heir apparent to the British throne until the marriage of Charles and Diana in 1981. Both women died before becoming queen consort. Camilla will be the first in three centuries to become consort.

(3) Anne of Hyde, and Wallis Simpson are the only two women to marry a man who was a king where the familial relationship between the spouses was unknown. Of course, neither was Queen Consort, Anne dying before James II became King, and Wallis marrying after Edward VIII abdicated. Both marriages were scandalous. Anne Hyde would give birth to two future queens, but neither Mary II, nor Anne had children.

(4) All 16 consorts since the marriages of Henry the 8th have been marriages between 3rd cousins once removed or closer with only one exception. George VI and Elizabeth (Queen Mother) were 13th cousins, having their most recent common ancestor of Henry the 7th who died 400 years before their wedding. Four of these 16 marriages have been between first cousins (William & Mary, George I, George IV, and Victoria & Albert), and one between first cousins once removed (Mary I & Phillip II, King of Spain). Table of 16 consort weddings (+2 that were not consorts) and degree of cousin relationship & yes for "once removed".

1 yes Queen Mary I & Felipe II von Habsburg
single Queen Elizabeth I ---
3 yes King James I Stuart & Anne von Oldenburg
3 yes King Charles I Stuart & Henriette-Marie de Bourbon,
illegit King Charles II Stuart ---
????? King James II Stuart & Anne Hyde
3 yes King James II Stuart & Maria Beatrice d'Este
1 Queen Mary II William & Mary (co-monarchs)
2 yes Queen Anne & Georg von Oldenburg
1 King George I & Sophia Dorothea
3 yes King George II & Queen Caroline
3 King George III & Charlotte Mecklenburg
1 King George IV & Karoline von Braunschweig
3 yes King William IV & Adelheid von Sachsen-Meiningen
1 Queen Victoria & Prince Albert
3 King Edward VII & Queen Alexandra
2 yes King George V & Queen Mary
????? King Edward VIII & Wallis Simpson
13 King George VI & Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon
2 yes Queen Elizabeth II & Prince Philip

(5) All marriages from Henry 8th back to William the Conqueror tended towards more distant cousins, but no further than 6th cousins. Richard III, and Anne Neville were first cousins once removed, but they formed the only marriage that was that close.

(6) Diana closest familial relationship to Charles was 7th cousin, once removed. Camilla's closest is 11th cousin to Charles.

(7) :ermm: Kate Middleton's family history is not well documented in the 18th century. She may be a descendant of Mary Boleyn. William is descended from both children of Mary Boleyn. Of course, both children are suspected of being fathered by Henry the 8th. If she does become Queen, I suspect that some graves will be interred to do DNA testing.

(8) :ohmy: Any two people with even a drop of English blood are probably at least as close as 30th cousin to each other. It is estimated that anyone with English blood has better than a 99.9% chance of being descended from Edward III, who lived through the black death. He is known to have many descendants in the first few generations at the same time most of his countrymen were dying of plague. The estimate is derived from using known rates of marriage, children, and cousin marriages in later eras,

(9) I have never thought of Scotch as a way to describe people.

(10) The Duke of Kent and his wife do not appear to have a close marriage. She was notably absent from the 60th anniversary party of The Queen and Duke of Edinburgh.

(11) The relatively infrequent marriages to the first cousin would be very unlikely to significantly increase the risk of latent genetic disease. Only two of the first cousins marriages (George I, and Victoria) produced a lot of descendants. The genetic disease prevalent in Pakistani-British that is widely reported by BBC, results from the overwhelming repetition of first-cousin marriages in all generations. The genetic diseases in the Hapsburgs was the result of repeated uncle/niece marriages as well as cousin marriages. The monstrous Charles II, the last Hapsburg king of Spain, had so much intermarriage in his ancestry that he had the genetic equivalent of being born to full blooded siblings. The genetic disease of hemophilia that Victoria spread is completely unrelated to her first cousin marriage. I am pointing out these facts, because of the careless use of the term "inbred" by some people. It's probably fair to say that the royals in the past were not very outbred , but the term inbred is an overstatment and insulting.
.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I could be having a senior moment, but was it not at Balmoral where Andrew was photographed last year with the Labradors and appeared to be hitting them with a big stick, that got all the bad publicity?
 
I could be having a senior moment, but was it not at Balmoral where Andrew was photographed last year with the Labradors and appeared to be hitting them with a big stick, that got all the bad publicity?
That was Edward at Sandringham.
 
Does this extend to those of us who descent from the Anglo-Norman families also? .

I think this is forgetting a very important fact, until very recently royals married royals and aristocrats married aristocrats and only fairly recently "historywise" did anyone else even get near royalty and the aristocracy. In fact it was even very rare for someone from the north of England to marry someone from the South as travel for people who didn´t belong to the aristocracy or monied people just didn´t leave their villages or towns.
Royal bastards were usually recognized and many given titles and honours, of course I am talking about "way back then".
 
I think this is forgetting a very important fact, until very recently royals married royals and aristocrats married aristocrats and only fairly recently "historywise" did anyone else even get near royalty and the aristocracy. In fact it was even very rare for someone from the north of England to marry someone from the South as travel for people who didn´t belong to the aristocracy or monied people just didn´t leave their villages or towns.
Royal bastards were usually recognized and many given titles and honours, of course I am talking about "way back then".

Not quite. Remember that the children of younger sons of Nobles do not have titles and are not considered aristocracy. What often happened is the the granddaughters of say an Earl, through a younger son, would marry into local gentry. Their daughters would marry a little bit further down the rung, say into merchants and so on. This is how so many, if not most British can be descended from royalty.
 
As recent posts have moved away from the topic of royal marriages they have been moved to the Lines of Descent thread.
 
What other pontential wives,other Mary,Queen of Scots,were going to be a consort to Edward VI?
 
What other pontential wives,other Mary,Queen of Scots,were going to be a consort to Edward VI?

Other than Mary, Queen of Scots, there were two other brides put forth to be Edward VI's wife..

Thomas Seymour's scheme was to marry him to Lady Jane Grey, but he failed in his intentions to manipulate his nephew into marriage with the lady, even though Edward was fond of his cousin. Seymour certainly lead Jane's parents to believe that he could bring off the match, which was the main reason she was present in Catherine Parr's household at the same time as (Princess) Elizabeth.

Jane appeared to be receptive to the match as well, unlike her reaction at marriage with Guilford Dudley..

In 1551, Edward was betrothed to Elisabeth de Valois, daughter of Henri II and Queen Catherine de Medici of France. This betrothal was presumably in effect until Edward's death, but the actual marriage never took place. Elisabeth was then betrothed to Carlos, Prince of Asturias, son of Philip II of Spain.. but that marriage became untenable due to Carlos' mental illness.. so she became the third wife of Philip himself in 1559. She was 14 when she became Queen Consort of Spain.. her husband was 32 and twice widowed (his second wife being Queen Mary I of England).

Elisabeth de Valois died in childbirth at the age of twenty-three, and Philip II would marry his fourth wife in 1570.
 
Was Princess Catherine of Sweden, born in 1539, a potential bride for King Edward VI?
 
Other than she was Protestant Princess I have never seen her name mentioned though I could be wrong.
 
After his bride Anne Neville's demise, if King Richard III had married his niece Elizabeth, the daughter of King Edward IV, how much would this marriage have strengthened Richard's hold on the throne?
 
After his bride Anne Neville's demise, if King Richard III had married his niece Elizabeth, the daughter of King Edward IV, how much would this marriage have strengthened Richard's hold on the throne?

Wouldn't that have been against the laws of consanquinity?
 
:previous:They would simply need dispensation from the Pope. There are certainly examples of Uncles marrying nieces in royal history.

But the stories of him wanting to marry Elizabeth are likely just that, stories.

They are based on a supposed letter whose existence is questionable.

Richard's entire claim to the throne was that his brother's children were bastards, so he was the rightful king. He gained nothing by marrying his brother's bastard daughter. Only if she was legitimate would it bolster a claim to the throne. But if he admitted she was not a bastard, that would mean her siblings were not. And it would destroy his claim to the throne.

Henry VII on the other hand benefited from marrying her. In his case it did bolster his own claim. As he was able to say 'she was the legal daughter of the king' so they connected two lines of the family together.


At the time he is said to have been courting Elizabeth his attention was on Portugal and on Princess Joanna specifically.
 
Wouldn't that have been against the laws of consanquinity?

Yes. At the time they had pretty expansive degrees of Kinship. The Tables of Kindred and Affinity are still in the back of the modern Book of Common Prayer which dates from 1662, which admittedly is about 180 years later and Uncle/Niece is definitely included.

It wasn't entirely unheard of in continental Europe at the time in Portugal, Spain or Italy but I don't think it had ever happened (on a royal level) in the UK.

I can't see that it would have made the King or couple very popular or would have helped Richard at all.

I think we have Philippa Gregory for popularising this "romance" :rolleyes: in recent years.
 
Back
Top Bottom