Marriage to Commoners vs Royals/Nobles

[Tatiana Maria]

I admit I'm unfamiliar with the history of the term "dynastic". Would you happen to have any examples if it being traditionally used in that sense?

 

[SirGyamfi1]

I admit I'm unfamiliar with the history of the term "dynastic". Would you happen to have any examples if it being traditionally used in that sense?

For example, the marriage of Grand Duchess Charlotte of Luxembourg to Prince Felix of Bourbon-Parma is a good example of a traditional dynastic marriage, another one is that of Princess Marina of Greece to Prince George, Duke of Kent as well as Archduke Karl of Austria to Zita of Bourbon-Parma. Those marriages were not only legally recognized, but were marriages of equals.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

The possible exception would be Princess Sibylla Erba-Odescalchi, daughter of Prince Alexander Erba-Odescalchi and Archduchess Margarethe of Austria who ended up in Sweden after the Red Army conquered Hungary in 1945.
Given that Proposition 261 of 1936 to change the Order of Succession speaks about "consorts from reigning houses or from some to them equal non-reigning houses" it could be argued that Sibylla would have been seen as an equal match had Carl Gustav wanted to marry her. Especially considering that a Lady Mountbatten and a Princess of Leuchtenberg had earlier been deemed suitable matches for Swedish crown princes.

No she wouldn’t have counted because Sibylla was not an agnatic descendant of the Erba-Odeschalchi family, her father was a descendant of the family via his mother not his father and one of the titles of Erba family were simply granted to him because of his ancestry.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

The possible exception would be Princess Sibylla Erba-Odescalchi, daughter of Prince Alexander Erba-Odescalchi and Archduchess Margarethe of Austria who ended up in Sweden after the Red Army conquered Hungary in 1945.
Given that Proposition 261 of 1936 to change the Order of Succession speaks about "consorts from reigning houses or from some to them equal non-reigning houses" it could be argued that Sibylla would have been seen as an equal match had Carl Gustav wanted to marry her. Especially considering that a Lady Mountbatten and a Princess of Leuchtenberg had earlier been deemed suitable matches for Swedish crown princes.

No she wouldn’t have counted because Sibylla was not an agnatic descendant of the Erba-Odeschalchi family, her father was a descendant of the family via his mother not his father and one of the titles of Erba family were simply granted to him because of his ancestry.

The old marriage clause in the Swedish Act of Succession did not require membership of a reigning house or equal-to-reigning house to be through agnatic descent. JR76 gave the examples of Lady Louise Mountbatten and Princess Josephine of Leuchtenberg, both of whose agnatic ancestors were of unequal rank but were accepted as equal brides at least in part because they belonged to reigning families through non-agnatic descent.

I admit I'm unfamiliar with the history of the term "dynastic". Would you happen to have any examples if it being traditionally used in that sense?

For example, the marriage of Grand Duchess Charlotte of Luxembourg to Prince Felix of Bourbon-Parma is a good example of a traditional dynastic marriage, another one is that of Princess Marina of Greece to Prince George, Duke of Kent as well as Archduke Karl of Austria to Zita of Bourbon-Parma. Those marriages were not only legally recognized, but were marriages of equals.

I meant historical examples of people utilizing the phrase "dynastic marriage" as a synonym for "equal marriage".

 

[SirGyamfi1]

The old marriage clause in the Swedish Act of Succession did not require membership of a reigning house or equal-to-reigning house to be through agnatic descent. JR76 gave the examples of Lady Louise Mountbatten and Princess Josephine of Leuchtenberg, both of whose agnatic ancestors were of unequal rank but were accepted as equal brides at least in part because they belonged to reigning families through non-agnatic descent.






I meant historical examples of people utilizing the phrase "dynastic marriage" as a synonym for "equal marriage".

Joséphine of Leutchenberg was before they started marrying actual reigning royal families and the British court technically lied about Louise Mountbatten’s status and the Swedish court at that point weren’t really bothered because the King already had heirs.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Joséphine of Leutchenberg was before they started marrying actual reigning royal families

No, the marriage clause was included in the Act of Succession from 1810 (Josephine married Oscar II in 1823). It was never tightened after that, and in fact was relaxed in 1937 and again in 1980.

and the British court technically lied about Louise Mountbatten’s status and the Swedish court at that point weren’t really bothered because the King already had heirs.

Where is the evidence that the British court lied about Lady Louise Mountbatten's status? They stated that she was a member of the British royal house, which indeed she was.

https://sok.riksarkivet.se/sbl/artikel/9693

 

[SirGyamfi1]

Dynastic marriages were often diplomatic marriages, made to improve relations between two countries, e.g. the marriage of the Prussian Prince Friedrich to the British Princess Victoria. That idea pretty much died out in the second half of the 19th century. I think dynastic marriage is now used mainly to describe marriages between two members of royal dynasties, which are unusual now.

Princess Victoria’s marriage was a love match though.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

Although much more meritocratic than it once was there are still entrenched elements of a class system in the UK, especially in England. The way you pronounce words, indeed what words you actually use, & where you went to school can be subtle indicators of your position in an invisible system.

When a close relative of the monarch marries a Briton who went to a state school that will be a strong signal that class barriers are breaking down.

I highly doubt that marriage between a close relative of the monarch and a state school educated person will be a sign of class barriers breaking down.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

Am I not correct that Napoleon was from a very modest family though he was very successful at warfare. However HE crowned himself emperor sooo, what about this Prince mentioned above .... he calls himself a Prince but what makes him so? I suspect that most royals started out the very same way so who is to say one is royal or not?

He wasn’t from a modest background, but minor nobility from Corsica. Plus they made good matches with other royal houses.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I highly doubt that marriage between a close relative of the monarch and a state school educated person will be a sign of class barriers breaking down.

So if not class barriers, what has prevented close relatives of monarchs from marrying state school-educated people (who comprise the vast majority of Britons) up to now?

 

[SirGyamfi1]

So if not class barriers, what has prevented close relatives of monarchs from marrying state school-educated people (who comprise the vast majority of Britons) up to now?

My point was that class is an inevitable part of society regardless of you living a monarchy or a republic. Maybe in the 50s class barriers would be a problem but today not so much. Also people these days don’t care to marry into the BRF not because of class issues but because of unnecessary scrutiny and attention from the media.

 

[Prinsara]

Princess Victoria’s marriage was a love match though.

No, it was set up for political purposes and the people involved happened to fall in love before the proposal (if you can consider 14-year-old Vicky's feelings as sufficiently mature enough). That's a "perfectly arranged marriage". It's not a love match with no consideration other than the feelings and wishes of the parties.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

No, it was set up for political purposes and the people involved happened to fall in love before the proposal (if you can consider 14-year-old Vicky's feelings as sufficiently mature enough). That's a "perfectly arranged marriage". It's not a love match with no consideration other than the feelings and wishes of the parties.

Did she get married at 14?No. I forgot that the marriage from the POV of Prince Albert was a political and liberal plan of his, but at the end of the day she loved her husband and shared similar ideals of his.

 

[Somebody]

My point was that class is an inevitable part of society regardless of you living a monarchy or a republic. Maybe in the 50s class barriers would be a problem but today not so much. Also people these days don’t care to marry into the BRF not because of class issues but because of unnecessary scrutiny and attention from the media.

That might be true but I have always been surprised how much more class is an issue in the British society than in many other countries. The distinction between those educated at state schools versus those who aren't being a clear example of it.

I am not sure about it being about 'caring'to marry in the BRF. It is unlikely that members of the BRF form friendships with those that aren't part of their 'class' - as they move in distinctly different circles- making in unlikely they'll marry outside their class (although their class is no longer confined to the aristocracy but now also includes the new rich). So, from that perspective such an across-class royal marriage would be a small sign that the barriers between classes are breaking down a bit.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

That might be true but I have always been surprised how much more class is an issue in the British society than in many other countries. The distinction between those educated at state schools versus those who aren't being a clear example of it.

I am not sure about it being about 'caring'to marry in the BRF. It is unlikely that members of the BRF form friendships with those that aren't part of their 'class' - as they move in distinctly different circles- making in unlikely they'll marry outside their class (although their class is no longer confined to the aristocracy but now also includes the new rich). So, from that perspective such an across-class royal marriage would be a small sign that the barriers between classes are breaking down a bit.

I don’t get why they are so obsessed with class, but everyone has their obsessions. They talk so much about it because in the U.K, all the books, theories, and politics as well as how some people turn out in life. They might be friends with aristocrats but they are less likely to marry them these days. Even if the monarchy and aristocracy were abolished, there would still be class issues. It’s a deep rooted thing.

 

[Prinsara]

Did she get married at 14?No. I forgot that the marriage from the POV of Prince Albert was a political and liberal plan of his, but at the end of the day she loved her husband and shared similar ideals of his.

Aside from the fact that engagement was considered as serious as marriage back then and you completely forgot the Prince Consort's role in this, what's your point? That if she hadn't loved the guy when she agreed to marry him but did by the wedding, that makes it more of a love match than an arrangement?

Yes, Vicky happened to love Fritz very much, probably even when they got engaged (and fortunately he was equally devoted to her), and their marriage worked. That doesn't mean it was their idea.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

Aside from the fact that engagement was considered as serious as marriage back then and you completely forgot the Prince Consort's role in this, what's your point? That if she hadn't loved the guy when she agreed to marry him but did by the wedding, that makes it more of a love match than an arrangement?

Yes, Vicky happened to love Fritz very much, probably even when they got engaged (and fortunately he was equally devoted to her), and their marriage worked. That doesn't mean it was their idea.

The point was that regardless of how the marriage was planned or arranged, the marriage worked because the two people liked each other and shared similar values. Was the marriage unhappy? No. The only unhappy moment was when he died of throat cancer. Yes, it was purposely arranged, but Victoria thought just like her father when it came to his political ideas where she was concerned.

 

[victor1319]

Love match... I think, one should not forget, that arranged marriages are still common for billions of people on this little planet!

And an arranged marriage must not be a forced one! Even for non-muslim Indians it is still common, that the families get involved into match-making. And this might be a good thing - the "wisdom of the many"...

More than one of us might be the result of two drunken young folks in the back of a car, which married afterwards, because - you know - the necessities... That is not necessarily better than an arranged marriage!

 

[SirGyamfi1]

Love match... I think, one should not forget, that arranged marriages are still common for billions of people on this little planet!

And an arranged marriage must not be a forced one! Even for non-muslim Indians it is still common, that the families get involved into match-making. And this might be a good thing - the "wisdom of the many"...

More than one of us might be the result of two drunken young folks in the back of a car, which married afterwards, because - you know - the necessities... That is not necessarily better than an arranged marriage!

That’s a good point. Nice to see a different perspective.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Although much more meritocratic than it once was there are still entrenched elements of a class system in the UK, especially in England. The way you pronounce words, indeed what words you actually use, & where you went to school can be subtle indicators of your position in an invisible system.

When a close relative of the monarch marries a Briton who went to a state school that will be a strong signal that class barriers are breaking down.

I highly doubt that marriage between a close relative of the monarch and a state school educated person will be a sign of class barriers breaking down.

So if not class barriers, what has prevented close relatives of monarchs from marrying state school-educated people (who comprise the vast majority of Britons) up to now?

My point was that class is an inevitable part of society regardless of you living a monarchy or a republic. Maybe in the 50s class barriers would be a problem but today not so much. Also people these days don’t care to marry into the BRF not because of class issues but because of unnecessary scrutiny and attention from the media.

Durham never said anything about monarchy versus republic or about class not being an inevitable part of society.

Media scrutiny and attention affect both privately-educated and state-educated people.

Dynastic marriages were often diplomatic marriages, made to improve relations between two countries, e.g. the marriage of the Prussian Prince Friedrich to the British Princess Victoria. That idea pretty much died out in the second half of the 19th century. I think dynastic marriage is now used mainly to describe marriages between two members of royal dynasties, which are unusual now.

Princess Victoria’s marriage was a love match though.

The point was that regardless of how the marriage was planned or arranged, the marriage worked because the two people liked each other and shared similar values. Was the marriage unhappy? No. The only unhappy moment was when he died of throat cancer. Yes, it was purposely arranged, but Victoria thought just like her father when it came to his political ideas where she was concerned.

Given that you were responding to Alison H's post about diplomatic marriages when you wrote "Princess Victoria’s marriage was a love match though", I, like Prinsara, interpreted your post to mean you believed Victoria's marriage was not diplomatically arranged. After all, Alison H's post did not say anything about whether or not the marriages worked.

Of course we all realize it is possible for diplomatically arranged spouses to come to love one another.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

Durham never said anything about monarchy versus republic or about class not being an inevitable part of society.

Media scrutiny and attention affect both privately-educated and state-educated people.


My point was that whether a close relative of the monarch marrying a person from a state education background wouldn’t change anything about class in the U.K. me bringing up the republic and monarchy angle is because it’s easier to be critical about class in a country with a monarchy and aristocracy versus a republic which has more subtle signs of social class. My point in the media scrutiny issue is that very few people from the titled aristocracy to the untitled (non-aristocratic/working class) would want the issues of media scrutiny of being part of the BRF is what I am saying.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

My point was that whether a close relative of the monarch marrying a person from a state education background wouldn’t change anything about class in the U.K.

Durham wasn't saying that a close relative of the monarch marrying a person with a state education would change class barriers in the UK. He was saying that breakdown of class barriers might make it more plausible for a close relative of the monarch to marry a person with a state education.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

Durham wasn't saying that a close relative of the monarch marrying a person with a state education would change class barriers in the UK. He was saying that breakdown of class barriers might make it more plausible for a close relative of the monarch to marry a person with a state education.

I don’t think that members of the BRF are necessarily concerned with what school a hypothetical spouse went to. What would cause a breakdown in class barriers? I just think people marry whoever they like or at least someone with similar interests to them. I don’t believe that members of the BRF are concerned that much with class like some people.