The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Join The Royal Forums Today
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 08-30-2017, 09:23 PM
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,458
I think, technically, that everyone who isn't born into the BRF is considered a commoner. I agree that the Spencers are an old and very prominent aristocratic family but they weren't once Kings. More Northamptonshire sheep farmers! Like most quite old aristo families they have royal blood in the family from Charles II (who sired quite a lot of illegitimate children) and on the distaff side I believe James II, but that blood came from advantageous marriages as the Spencers went up in the world and made their mark in national life.

Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2017, 09:45 PM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,918

Read the history of the Spencer family that I linked above. Winston Churchill is a related member of the Spencer clan as well.

Also @Denville's reference to Fergie being from 'landed gentry.' So what? So is Camilla from the 'landed gentry' class, which is below the aristocracy/nobility.

And yes, the Spencers are aristocrats who are related to royalty via illegitimate ancestors:
"Today's Spencers are direct descendants, albeit illegitimate, of the House of Stuart, with the family boasting at least five lines of direct descent from the Stuarts; and from them, the Spencers can trace their ancestry to other royal houses such as the Bourbons, the Medicis, the Wittelsbachs, the Hanovers, the Sforzas, the Habsburgs, and the Houses of Howard and Boleyn through Mary Boleyn, Mistress of Henry VIII of England."

Also the term 'commoner' in the U.K. refers to "a person who is not born into a position of high social rank." That absolutely does not describe Diana or her family! She was not born of royalty, but she was a member of the aristocracy/nobility. The ancestors who began as sheep farmers is not recent. It's very far back. Still, there's nothing wrong with sheep farmers, but Diana did not grow up the daughter of a sheep farmer! Another famous ancestor of Diana's was Lady Georgiana Spencer who married the Duke of Devonshire (another famous British aristocratic family).

Interestingly the Spencers were also related to George Washington's family.

Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2017, 02:11 AM
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,458
It's a little more complex than that, though of course only in the technical sense. Both Lady Elizabeth Bowes Lyon and Diana were commoners before they married as they weren't peers just held courtesy titles.

Is it possible for a royal to be a commoner? – Royal Central

I meant by my comment that the direct Spencer line did not, at the beginning, contain Kings or Queens. In early Tudor times they were simple Northamptonshire farmers, sheep farmers. Of course, as they became more prosperous and more grand they did aquire ancestors who had royal blood via brides from the gentry and aristocracy who MARRIED into the Spencer line. The Spencers didn't have it inherently, from the family's earliest beginnings. And the Royal blood was through illegitimacy though the progeny certainly had all the lineage you mentioned.
Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2017, 07:48 AM
Jacknch's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Suffolk, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,229
Let's get back on topic please - the thread is about true love marriages and not a debate on who is or is not a "commoner".
Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2017, 07:59 AM
Imperial Majesty
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 10,264
Definitely all morganatic marriages were of true love.
Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2018, 02:37 PM
CyrilVladisla's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Conneaut, United States
Posts: 7,797
Queen Victoria of Great Britain and Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha
Prince Joachim and Princess Marie of Denmark
Prince Felix and Princess Claire of Luxembourg

Reply With Quote

royal, true love

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
The Royal Marriages Act of 1772 and Royal Marriages branchg British Royals 99 12-31-2012 09:24 PM
Is it true love??? nilah King Felipe VI, Queen Letizia and Family 93 01-19-2005 11:45 PM

Popular Tags
america american archie mountbatten-windsor asia asian birth britain britannia british british royal family buckingham palace camilla camilla's family camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles charles china chinese colorblindness crown jewels customs doge of venice dresses duchess of sussex duke of sussex elizabeth ii family tree fashion and style gemstones genetics george vi gradenigo harry and meghan hello! henry viii highgrove history house of windsor hypothetical monarchs japanese imperial family japan history jewellery king juan carlos liechtenstein lili mountbatten-windsor medical monarchist movements monarchists monarchy mongolia names nara period plantinum jubilee politics prince harry prince of wales in jordan queen elizabeth ii queen victoria royal ancestry solomon j solomon spanish royal family st edward sussex suthida tradition unfinished portrait united states united states of america wales welsh

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:32 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises