True Love Marriages

[SLV]

The riches and position may have attracted a person. But love can come next.

[Lee-Z]

Is "True Love" always a good thing? Imo another example were Tzar Nicolas II and his wife Alexandra of Russia; i think it's widely accepted that theirs was a total love match, but i don't think it wasn't good for his reign as a Tzar

[Osipi]

If we really, really want to complicate things, the Greeks had it right and I suppose one could find "true" love in any one of their applications of words for love.

There's phileo which is easily seen in the name of the city of brotherly love, Philadelphia. We love our brothers and sisters and fellow human beings for the most part anyways. One who marries on the foundation of companionship would find this to be true love.

Then there is eros. A couple that marries with a very healthy appetite for each other would still have true love in this sense of the word. We could probably guess that sooner or later the physical attraction and desire will get old and boring but its still a true sense by the Greek's definition.

Also, we have storge. This is mostly feelings that are true to one's own self such as "I love my wife", "I adore my dog" and "I just love how a hot soak makes me feel after a very long day". We all have things we love and hold dear.

Finally there is agape which is what I believe that most people seek when they're looking for true love. The "no matter what" kind of love that strives to support and encourage the other person to be the best possible person they can be. It is giving with no expectations of return.

In reality, couples (royalty and commoner alike) put their own definitions on what love means to them and how it manifests in their lives.

Gotta love the ancient Greeks. They knew what they were talking about.

[Queen Claude]

Originally Posted by Mirabel

I'm not sure endurance is a proof of love. In earlier times, it was considered somehow shameful to have a failed marriage, especially among royalty.
People were expected to grin and bear it.

As for true love, (and I'm not referring to anyone specific here) is it really considered true love when one party is a player?

As I've been reading this I have intermittently had the opposite thought, and that is that endurance may also not be proof of a lack of love, and that there may have been true (and mutual) love at the beginning but over time the individuals in the marriage changed and they either fell out of love, or the intensity of the love faded.

Also I don't think that grinning and bearing is automatically a bad thing, or let me modify the comment and say that a relationship where the couple is no longer have the same love that led to the marriage, or were never truly in love, are considered lesser because they choose to stay in the marriage. In Charles and Diana's case they made each other miserable but that may not be the case with other royal and non-royal couples who choose to stay together even if it appears that they are no longer in love (or were never truly in love).

Another thought, and this is where I think that endurance is a factor, is that a royal or non-royal marriages could have started out as seemingly a non-love match, or a one-sided relationship, but can still be considered a successful marriage with true love. I think that's where the breakdown of love types listed above is a great addition to the discussion because you can see a marriage that may not have started out with eros love can still be considered a true love marriage IMHO.

[MARG]

Originally Posted by Mirabel

It has nothing to do with social and cultural gaps, and everything to do with rumored other interests.

Hmm, where do your "rumoured" other interests come from? Got to wonder who, in particular, you are referring to because it's so vague it casts a pall over everyone. Most would attribute it to their least popular couples.

I think Elizabeth and Philip are a remarkable pair. Many say he married her because of who she was but, I don't think he did. He chose between a brilliant naval career and Elizabeth, and with his nature that is saying something.

As to Mary and Fred, I think she fell in love with Fred's unique charm and I think things were harder for her than for most others. M-M and Haakon had a language in common as did Victoria and Daniel and Felipe and Letizia even though they were really middle class as is Mary. Maxima was multi-lingual and moved in high society as did Stephanie, Mathilde but Mary came from Australia (and NZ) where second languages were never deemed important.

They say that after your second language, the third come more easily unless of course, you learn both from the cradle.

[Pranter]

Originally Posted by Mirabel

Oh, I do believe in true love.
But- I also believe the Duc et Pair has a point.

After all, how many poor old men do you know of with beautiful young wives?

As the saying goes most average/poor men 'marry up' when it comes to age/looks.

Really who defines what someone else finds attractive though? There are movie stars some women rave about that I don't find attractive (same goes for royals).

Certainly at the end of the day personality and who the person is in their character should be (and is) more important for most of us.

There's really nothing wrong with marrying a rich man (or a poor one) if done for the right reasons. I suspect there's more than one person who has married for money and found the price is not worth it.


LaRae

[Duke of Marmalade]

Originally Posted by Skippy

That's worth considering, although there is no attainable proof whatsoever.
With Mary I am able to imagine something like it. Máxima a little less, Letizia I don't know. I know so little about her.

Maxima moved in upper social circles before meeting WA so it was clear that she would never marry a binman, so to say. I think theirs is a perfect match, LOVE is a word with big shoes to fill but they match really well, with Maxima bringing all her virtues to the table, fully appreciated by family & country. Her personality fits the Dutch mentality like a glove.

Letizia is a different matter, I see her as a career woman who probably misjudged what she was getting into. She clearly has virtues but necessarily not those suitable for a Queen, and for various reasons has not been allowed to show what she can do, she lost 10 years and in the current climate it is too late to make up too much ground (popularity of Letizia herself and the monarchy).

On engagement day she said she was looking forward 'to working with Felipe on their project' what put a lot of people off and make her look like a social climber who was after the position only. If she was, it did not work out.
Same here as Maxima, no chance for a binman.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Lee-Z

Is "True Love" always a good thing? Imo another example were Tzar Nicolas II and his wife Alexandra of Russia; i think it's widely accepted that theirs was a total love match, but i don't think it wasn't good for his reign as a Tzar

I dont really see that. Nic and Alexandra loved each other, and were close and that must have helped them through the bad days. It wasnt' a good thing that they were both pretty stupid and that Alexandra didn't get on with most people, from the Imp Family to the court to the common people.

But with modern day royals I dont really see how one can tell who is in love or isn't. Royals have to act, in public. They may have started out in love in some cases and as time passes teh love has gone cooler or dull.. but they are still going to be seen as enjoying each other's company in public. Fergie and Andy were in love I think at the beginning and were always looking happy and fond and with a lot of PDA but within a few years, they were divorcing. It was probalby true at first, that they loved each other but it didn't last long.
with other royals I am a bit doubtful as to how much in love they are. After all, in most cases, the wife is from a lower rank and is problaby not as rich.. so that has to be a bit tempting. As against that, of course a woman can marry a rich man who DOESNT have the burden of royal life and public appearances...

Originally Posted by Pranter

As the saying goes most average/poor men 'marry up' when it comes to age/looks.

Really who defines what someone else finds attractive though? There are movie stars some women rave about that I don't find attractive (same goes for royals).



LaRae

That's true. I think that there are some who most people would see as beautiful, and others that have to be described as "homely" but all the same ideas of beauty can vary widely. Pr charles had a very beautiful wife, and now a rather average looking one. I think it is obvious which one he loves most. All the same, not everyone found Diana beautiful..
In any case I think that affection adn respect are more important than "romantic love."

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by Denville

That's true. I think that there are some who most people would see as beautiful, and others that have to be described as "homely" but all the same ideas of beauty can vary widely. Pr charles had a very beautiful wife, and now a rather average looking one. I think it is obvious which one he loves most. All the same, not everyone found Diana beautiful..
In any case I think that affection adn respect are more important than "romantic love."

In their younger years Charles and Camilla would have formed an attractive pair, I must say: picture.

[Curryong]

Camilla was never more than average in looks, with a rather rictus gummy smile. She was attractive to males because of her personality, sense of fun, rather than any glamour or prettiness.

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by Curryong

Camilla was never more than average in looks, with a rather rictus gummy smile. She was attractive to males because of her personality, sense of fun, rather than any glamour or prettiness.

Sounds very good. The attractiveness is deeper than just looks.

[Pranter]

Originally Posted by Denville

I dont really see that. Nic and Alexandra loved each other, and were close and that must have helped them through the bad days. It wasnt' a good thing that they were both pretty stupid and that Alexandra didn't get on with most people, from the Imp Family to the court to the common people.

But with modern day royals I dont really see how one can tell who is in love or isn't. Royals have to act, in public. They may have started out in love in some cases and as time passes teh love has gone cooler or dull.. but they are still going to be seen as enjoying each other's company in public. Fergie and Andy were in love I think at the beginning and were always looking happy and fond and with a lot of PDA but within a few years, they were divorcing. It was probalby true at first, that they loved each other but it didn't last long.
with other royals I am a bit doubtful as to how much in love they are. After all, in most cases, the wife is from a lower rank and is problaby not as rich.. so that has to be a bit tempting. As against that, of course a woman can marry a rich man who DOESNT have the burden of royal life and public appearances...

All the public front and act in the world can't overrirde body language. That's what tells you the real story.



LaRae

[Curryong]

The trouble is that apart from major events and televised weddings etc we the public often don't get enough of the body language to make much of a judgement.

King Felipe and Queen Letizia, for example often exchange fond glances that are caught by the camera, King Willem-Alexander and Queen Maxima usually enjoy each other's company, but a lot of other royal couples don't interact a lot, especially if they're not the demonstrative types. It's a bit difficult to tell too, if people are on a balcony just generally enjoying themselves with others that one couple or another are really loving with each other.

In general though, my opinion is that the vast majority of royal couples are quite happy together. We can all think of the one or two glaring exceptions I'm sure, for instance I'm none too certain of the state of play in the King and Queen of Sweden's marriage, and King Juan Carlos and Queen Sofia of Spain are sadly unhappy together. For most though, I don't think divorce is on the horizon at all!

[Marty91charmed]

I think that all the modern couple married because they are in and I'm not sure what "true love" means ???

If I have to think about older couple I do think that most royals stay together because of mutual affection rather than love, mostly because the relationsnhip has run its course.

[Denville]

BOdy language? How can taht mean anything? We see royals when they are out in public playing the happy couple doing thier job together.. They are acitng like a fond couple regardless of how they are feeling. And As I have said Sarah and Andy were all lovey dovey in public and were the first to get a divorce.
I dont see how one can tell how happy the average royal couple is.. Charles and Cam, i'd say are happy, becuase i think they've known each other long enough to know how to make their relationshp work.. Same wiht the queen adn Philip. Others, I wouldn't know.

[Mirabel]

Originally Posted by Pranter

All the public front and act in the world can't overrirde body language. That's what tells you the real story.



LaRae

Not only that...but in these times, eyes are everywhere, and indiscretions will out.
It's really difficult to cover up affairs for very long.

[Curryong]

Yes, but it's not just adultery that can destroy a marriage, is it? There can be coldness, emotional abuse, withering contempt, a long lingering drifting apart, so that a couple no longer has anything to say to each other.

I'm not saying that's the case with the majority of Royal couples that we see at all, but I do think that a great many royal families make a huge effort to play happy families in public when perhaps there are huge tensions within.

For instance, although I do believe that Queen Margrethe of Denmark has been mighty tolerant of Prince Henrik's moods how many of us would have predicted the events of the past few months.

And, as has been said, Joachim and Alexandra, and Sarah and Andrew were always smiling and happy in public. In reality, none of us really know how tensions play out in these families, affecting marriages.

[ricarda]

Originally Posted by Pranter

All the public front and act in the world can't overrirde body language. That's what tells you the real story.
LaRae

Oh dear, the body language readers! If you go back to the year 2004 you can find posts on this board about the wonderful body language between Joachim and Alexandra, a couple so much in love, and this was posted a couple of weeks before their divorce was announced. (And Joachim told later that their marriage had been in trouble for a couple of years. That was his real story) I guess those posters just interpreted their body language the way they wanted it to be. Or Joachim and Alexandra were just incredibly great actors.

[Moonmaiden23]

Count me in among those who don't believe a subjective opinion about a couples' body language will always tell the story. Sometimes it does, sometimes it does not. A lot of it has to do with a couples "style" together, their respective upbringings, their personalities, etc.

QEII and the Duke of Edinburgh are an example of a couple who I believe probably has a very strong union, but their public language as a couple is quite reserved and always has been even when they were young and reportedly passionately in love.

A more current example is Madeleine of Sweden and her husband Chris O'Neill. I believe they have a very solid union to one another, but they are not constantly seen holding hands and gazing into one another's eyes.

Astrid of Belgium and Archduke Lorenz, another highly successful marriage of two people who have never been much for PDA.

The most famous example is of course Joachim and Alexandra of Denmark, who gave every indication of being starry eyed for one another right up to the day their divorce was announced.

At the end of the day the only two people who know what really goes on in a marriage are the two people who are in it.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by ricarda

Oh dear, the body language readers! If you go back to the year 2004 you can find posts on this board about the wonderful body language between Joachim and Alexandra, a couple so much in love, and this was posted a couple of weeks before their divorce was announced. (An Or Joachim and Alexandra were just incredibly great actors.

All royals are acting when in public. Some are better than others, but they are all going to act in public like they are an affectionate married or engaged couple. Some can't keep it up forever, certainly if the marriage is very bad, but in general, Im sure that even today -divorce is discouraged and so a couple will problaby put on a show in public all the more. And in any case, tehy are WORKING, when seen in public. You dont bring your private problems to work, as a rule. If one of them has a stomach ache or they a
had a row that morning, like the best of couples, they are goig to put on a smile and look like they are happy.