King Alexander I (1893-1920), Aspasia Manos (1896-1972) and dau Alexandra (1921-1993)


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

snowflower

Courtier
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
537
City
here and there
Country
Greece
Hi everyone! I ve noticed that there was no thread about King Alexander in the forum and it's such a pity because he had a quite interesting life, especially after his ascecion o the Greek Throne. His reign during those turbulent years of the war in Asia Minor , his love and marriage to a commoner and his sudden death always had an impression on me!
 
I agree with you, i have read a book about him few years back, not sure it was an accurate biography (its possible the author had many fictional dialogues) but still very very interesting.
 
Alexander was Queen Sophia's favorite son and not being allowed to return to the country when he was dying nearly killed her. Alexander's daughter, born after his death, later married the King of Yugoslavia. One fascinating fact is that Alexander assumed the throne before his elder brother, was succeeded by his father, and then Alexander's elder brother took the throne when their father, Constantine I, abdicated once again.
 
One question I have that, I guess, is difficult to be answered, is the reason behind King Constantine's decision to elevate Mme Manos by royal decree to HRH The Princess Aspasia and specifically:
1. Did he do it in order to go against prime minister Eleftherios Venizelos who insisted on the marriage being kept morganatic?
2. Did King Constantine feel that it would be embarrassing for a king's daughter not to be a princess of the blood?
3. Or was it Queen Sophia who insisted on that (I have heard also this version)?
4. Could he technically elevate Alexandra to HRH Princess Alexandra of Greece and Denmark, without prior elevation of her mother to similar style/title [and has there been a similar case in European Royal History]?
5. Whereas females were not allowed anyway to ascend to the Greek Throne, at that time, could King Constantine elevate [in the Battenberg precedent] Mme Manos to just HSH Princess Aspasia [without of Greece and Denmark], in which case the issue would have become HSH Princess Alexandra?
For historical reasons, I would love to hear th opinion of someone with insight in Greek Constitutional Law or Gotha matters
 
I ve always wondered if Alexander hadn't died so young and was made the" legal" King of Greece how history might have turned different . I m sure that if Venizelos had the opportunity he would try to achieve it. By the way did you know that Veizelos was so Much against Alexander's relationship with Aspasia? He wanted to marry him to Princess Mary of Great Britain in order to secure his place in Greek politics even further.....
 
I ve always wondered if Alexander hadn't died so young and was made the" legal" King of Greece how history might have turned different.
That is an interesting thought. Since his older brother George did not have any children, Alexander would have still probably have taken the throne after his father and brother, following the order of succession. Could he have had enough power to allow for his marriage to Aspasia recognized and given full dynastic rights to Alexandra or any other children they might have had? Since Queen Frederika's meddling in politics is sometimes blamed for the downfall of the Greek monarchy, it is definitely interesting to guess what would have happened if she hadn't been in such a high position of power.
 
One question I have that, I guess, is difficult to be answered, is the reason behind King Constantine's decision to elevate Mme Manos by royal decree to HRH The Princess Aspasia and specifically:
5. Whereas females were not allowed anyway to ascend to the Greek Throne, at that time, could King Constantine elevate [in the Battenberg precedent] Mme Manos to just HSH Princess Aspasia [without of Greece and Denmark], in which case the issue would have become HSH Princess Alexandra?

I do not know the answer to your questions, although I recall reading that Queen Sophia pushed through a law for the king to recognize Alexander's marriage. But I have never read that females were kept from the Greek throne? Was the Salic law applied in Greece?
 
I do not know the answer to your questions, although I recall reading that Queen Sophia pushed through a law for the king to recognize Alexander's marriage. But I have never read that females were kept from the Greek throne? Was the Salic law applied in Greece?
Females were not exactly kept from the throne. When the National Assembly declared Prince Willem of Denmark as King of Greece as George I it was also decided that "in the line of succesion with be all the legitime descendants of George I who are Greek in nationality and Easten Orthodox in religion, with preference over males issues"( "προτιμουμενων των αρρενων" ) But this was a little vague, as it did not clear whether it was semi salic or male primogeniture.They (the Greek royals) considered it semi salic until 1949 when the then Prime Minister declared that the true meaning of this article was with preference over the males issues of the reigning king, turning it to male primogeniture ( the reason behind this was the attempt of paul and frederika to push prince peter as back as possible to the succesion line) So under the Greek law Alexandra should be in the line on position before her marriage somewhere. The problem was whether her parents marriage was legal or not. Under the Greek law, it was legal because Alexander didn't need permission to marry someone since he was an adult and the constitution didn't prevent marriages between commoner and royals. Under the family law, however they needed to have permission from the king and Constantine never granted one. But on the other hand , Alexander was the King of the Hellenes then even if serving in his father's place. It's quite complicated I think.
 
Thank you for the explanation. I had read that Constantine, when he returned to the throne, treated Alexander's time as a regency which might have been pointed to, along with the morgantic implications, as an additional reason not to recognize Alexandra's claim to the throne.
 
Thank you for the explanation. I had read that Constantine, when he returned to the throne, treated Alexander's time as a regency which might have been pointed to, along with the morgantic implications, as an additional reason not to recognize Alexandra's claim to the throne.
His reign was a regency, thats how is regarded by the greek royal family and the historians. In his gravestone it is written " Alexander, prince of Greece , Prinds til Danmark, reigned instead of his father from 1917 to 1920". But for me, Alexandra should have been the Diadoch, upon George II 's ascecion and not Paul , because since Alexander was reigning when he got married and had all the powers of the crown in his hands ( his father was powerless during this period) he definately had the power to grant permission to his marriage with Aspasia.
 
I agree but what about the morgantic marriage? Or do you consider Constantine's 1922 elevation of Alexandra and her mother to royal status to overcome that hurdle?

This is another fascinating "what if" of history-- What if Alexandra took the throne instead of Paul? Would there still be a Greek monarchy?
 
well if Alexander had the regnal powers in his hands he could have made his daughter a princess with full rights ( with a little backing from politicians of course). But he necer lived long enough to see her born let alone declaring her princess.

I don't know how the history could have changed. George II would still be exiled and has returned. and died chidless But the minute Alexandra would get married to another royal, she would probably renounce every succesion right , just as the other greek princesses (with the exception of Princess Marie) On the other hand, the greeks might like the idea of Alexandra as a Queen, since her mother was a Greek and her father a well liked and sympathised King and thus she might be permitted to reign this her husband as prince consort. We could never tell I am afraid.

Another thing that is interesting was Venizelos idea of a marriage between princess Mary and Alexander. How ON EARTH , did he came up with this. I doubt George VI and QMary would ever accept this marriage....
 
Here are a few photos (Flickr, imageshack, gettyimages) :
1)Alexandra while in London
2)A painting of Alexander and Aspasia
3)Alexander as King
4)Aspasia
 

Attachments

  • alexanderaspasia.jpg
    alexanderaspasia.jpg
    4.7 KB · Views: 1,679
  • alexanderI.jpg
    alexanderI.jpg
    2.7 KB · Views: 1,720
  • alexandra.gif
    alexandra.gif
    105.5 KB · Views: 3,670
  • aspasia.jpg
    aspasia.jpg
    2 KB · Views: 1,675
Here are a few photos (Flickr, imageshack, gettyimages) :
1)Alexandra while in London

On the picture above she writes "To darling ------ with love". Can you fill in the rest?

..........Another thing that is interesting was Venizelos idea of a marriage between princess Mary and Alexander. How ON EARTH , did he came up with this. I doubt George VI and QMary would ever accept this marriage....

I would agree that King George and Queen Mary would have never accepted, considering that the situation in Greece was extremely unstable (if not unsafe) at the time. Otherwise, Alexander was king and a very handsome young man who enjoyed tremendous popularity. As to your question about the idea of Eleftherios Venizelos (EV): Yes, it is true that he was fantasizing about such an eventuality.
Why? Because Venizelos had developed very close ties with prime minister Lloyd George and a strong Alliance with Great Britain. Remember, IT was the time that Greece expanded greatly with the help of the Entente. Thus, EV was hoping to further the ties between Greece and Great Britain with yet another bond, ie possible marriage of Alexander and The Princess Royal.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
On the picture above she writes "To darling ------ with love". Can you fill in the rest?
It is " To darling mougey with love ". It was a pet name for her mother. Aspasia was "mougey"and Alexandra was "pougey".
 
I would agree that King George and Queen Mary would have never accepted, considering that the situation in Greece was extremely unstable (if not unsafe) at the time. Otherwise, Alexander was king and a very handsome young man who enjoyed tremendous popularity. As to your question about the idea of Eleftherios Venizelos (EV): Yes, it is true that he was fantasizing about such an eventuality.
Why? Because Venizelos had developed very close ties with prime minister Lloyd George and a strong Alliance with Great Britain. Remember, IT was the time that Greece expanded greatly with the help of the Entente. Thus, EV was hoping to further the ties between Greece and Great Britain with yet another bond, ie possible marriage of Alexander and The Princess Royal.
Is there a similar reason why the engagement of Princess Alexandra of Fife (King George and Queen Mary's niece) to Prince Christopher of Greece (Alexander's uncle) was broken?
 
I had read the families disapproved of the liaison but no reason was given.
 
I had read the families disapproved of the liaison but no reason was given.

The reason was mainly financial because Alexandra's parents didn't think that the Greek Royals could support a decent lifestyle for her. Moreover , when the Duke of Fife discovered that this secret liaison was promoted and wished by Princess Toria ( Alexandra's aunt) while she was supposed to chaperone her, he and Louise became furious with the liberty Toria had taken concerning their daughter and ended the liaison at once. As Prince Christopher said, they were heart broken for a while , but when they met again at Marina's wedding , they would recall these incindents like two good friends and would laugh over their "passion "and the idea that the marriage would have been possible....

When it comes to Princess Mary I doubt that her parents would have even considered the possibility of a marriage with Alexander. First of all , it was documented that they believed John's epilepsy was partly a result of intemarriage so they weren't keen on letting their children marry reltives ( when once someone proposed the Swedish princesses Astrid and Martha as potential matches for Edward, his parents said immediately no, because they thought it too risky). They prefered to see their children married to membes of the British nobility. Moreover , I doubt they would put at risk their daughter's well being for politics at a time when marriage alliances had become to decline as a habit . Besides , the diplomacy at that point wasn't exactly stable ( Britain after a while sided with Kemal ) so things might turn very difficult for Mary if this marriage ever occured.
 
Snowflower,

Many thanks for the information. How did you discover this? Was it found in a biography?
 
I am doing a report from my History class about the policies of Great Britain in eastern Meditteranean sea during WWI and WWII and the Greek royals just keep coming up ;). These days the University is on a strike so I have plenty of time to work on in and by the way I am finding ineteresting stuff to post here. Among the others, I am using for my report a book about Greek royal which is quite antimonarchical but has a lot of first hand documents in it so it is quite useful. I can't remember its title now , but when the university opens again in about a week I ll post it here.
There onecan find the main proof of Sophie's involvement in Alexander's death ( according to Greek politicians). After his funeral, Olga asked the staff workig in Tatoi to pack Alexander's personal belongings in order to take them to Swizerland. The guards read every tiny paper in his office because they didn't want the Queen to take with her any state paper and they came across a letter. Sophie had sent him to Alexander right after his marriage ( she didn't know yet he was married , it was still a secret) :

" my dear son, I am hearing here in exile that your childhood friendship and attraction to Petros Manos' daughter has developped into a serious romantic liaison. There are even rumors about a forthcoming marriage. I am imploring you , stop the liaison now , because behind the innocent love you and Aspasia have for each other there is a plot. Can't you see what will happen next? The policitians will force your father to abdicate in order to make you King. There is nothing more pleasing to that man Venizelos than to make her Queen in my place and take away your brother's birthright. You must never forgt that you are only a King in your father's place and it is your duty to your family to act for the sake of the dynasty. Oh these filthy Greek politicians! If I didn't know better, I would think that you falling for her is their plot and that she is a spy. I promise you when the happy days come again , we wll discuss if a marriage is possible. But right know, you must know that we are willing to use every possible help, legal or not to declare this marriage illegal"

Apparently , the politicians used this letter as a prof to spread the rumour that Sophie was the one who had provoked Alexander's death , acting behind the scenes. Yeah, right. :ermm:
 
Wow, fascinating stuff, snowflower. Thanks so much for providing it to this forum.
 
What strikes me is that the family was aware that he was attracted to Aspasia for a long time and they did nothing about it. So I wonder if Sophie said that when they came back they would discuss the possibility of a marriage because she meant it or just to cool him off . After all Aspasia was always a decent person and with all these fanariots and Wallachia rulers in her ancenstry she was a noble as far as a Greek could could be.
 
And yet, Alexander's uncle George was arranged to marry a Bonaparte (half royals by traditional standards) and Christopher married a divorced and widowed American commoner. Was it because both women brought enormous wealth to the family? It seemed if these women were allowed to contract dynastic marriages, why wasn't Aspasia? More recently, Prince Michael's marriage to Marina Karella was morganatic (although recognized by Constantine II), but Pavlos's to Marie-Chantal wasn't? I don't know what the specifics are, but it seems that marriages to Greek women were considered non-dynastic but marriages to extremely wealthy foreigners were. Odd.
 
It does seem odd why some marriages were viewed with favor, or at least little opposition, whereas others were not recognized and ended up hurting the royal's chance at succession for him and his children.
 
And yet, Alexander's uncle George was arranged to marry a Bonaparte (half royals by traditional standards) and Christopher married a divorced and widowed American commoner. Was it because both women brought enormous wealth to the family?
Absolutely, yes! In all fairness, though, Marie Bonaparte was a highly educated and sophisticated woman. Thus, money could/would not be the only reason a man would want to marry her.
It is true though that most Greek princes back then, particularly prince Andrew and prince Christopher, were literally penniless and living on the charity of relatives or at the expense of wealthy wives.

It seemed if these women were allowed to contract dynastic marriages, why wasn't Aspasia?
One may argue here that she was marrying a king or, at least, a king in a king's place.

More recently, Prince Michael's marriage to Marina Karella was morganatic (although recognized by Constantine II)
This marriage was dynastically irrelevant. Actually, the marriage was morganatic as you state, prince Michael had to resign his rights to the Throne and Madame Marina Karella remained Marina Karella. King Constantine approved of the marriage in a social, non-dynastic, sense. While the monarchy was in effect in Greece, Constantine had no constitutional right to elevate Mme Karella to princess except through introduction of new law. But even again, the Greek constitution of 1953 (the latest in effect before the fall of the monarchy) was not allowing the granting of titles to Greek citizens. Technically, therefore, Mme Karella would have to shed her Greek citizenship, become a citizen of somewhere, then become a prince's foreign bride and lastly become elevated to princess by law. But who would dare do all that and for a personage that was dynastically irrelevant, and, more importantly, at a time, that political changes in Greece were torrential.

..... but Pavlos's to Marie-Chantal wasn't?
This case is entirely different. After the divorce, so to speak, between Greece and king Constantine, the latter can do whatever he chooses. And, as long as he is not a citizen of Greece, he may even disregard the Constitution of Greece, but he may not offend the Hellenic Republic. So, it was entirely up to him to raise her to Crown Princess Paul or even to a suo jure princess, that is, Crown Princess Marie-Chantal without the of Greece. Finally, if she had married Crown Prince Paul while the monarchy was still in effect, she could/would now be called former Crown Princess Paul of Greece (assuming/hypothesizing that such a marriage would have been allowed by the government). As matters evolved, nonetheless, she is not/cannot be Crown Princess Paul of Greece or Crown Princess Marie-Chantal of Greece, but she is Crown Princess Paul or Crown Princess Marie-Chantal - whichever her father-in-law has chosen.

I don't know what the specifics are, but it seems that marriages to Greek women were considered non-dynastic but marriages to extremely wealthy foreigners were. Odd.
I hope my explanation regarding the case of Marina Karella answered also your last concern.
 
Here is article I ve found on the net by Lambrini Thoma and it was written at the 90th anniversary of Alexander’s ascension to the Greek Throne. ( translated by me )

Born the 20th July 1893 Prince Alexander the second son of King Constantine and Queen Sophia didn’t have many chances of assuming the throne. Diadoch George was in front of him in the line of succession and was after all prepared for this task. That’s why Alexander’s life was much more normal. No one reacted when he graduated with not so high grades from Euelpides ‘s School and no one thought he would resume a higher place than that of the aide de camp at his father side during a war.

But when in 1917 the Andante made the Germanphile King Constantine and Diadoch George to abandon the country and the throne so that Greece , leaded by Venizelos, could take their side , Alexander was thought to be the only viable solution. It appears he was the only member of the family who maintained a sufficiently good relationship with Venizelos, the real chief to the Greek politics at that time.

He ascended at the throne on 12 July 1917 ( 30 May O.C) , believing that one day he would hand the power back to his father. Alexander had never been an ambitious person and he understood that during these turbulent times, he should have a role purely unifying.

The calmnes he offered to Venizelos in the internals fights and the presence of Alexander at the throne lead to many positive results. Greece of that time is the one who manages to gain lands of strategic importance thanks to the treaties of Neilly ( 1919) and Sevres (1920), Smyrna and Western and Eastern Thrace with the exceptions of Istanbul become Greek territory – their political and geographical significance is obvious. These circumstances as well as the mild and gentle personality of Alexander ( who was greatly loved by Greeks) turned him into a king of diplomatic successes whose name became identical with the dream of a Greater Greece.
 
Optimism was the main felling in the up until then turbulent Greek politicall ife. However the next turbulence would not be political but social. Alexander was greatly in love with the beautiful Aspasia Manos , a commoner, daughter of a Police’s officer. He decided to marry her although Venizelos was asking him to make a political royal marriage, with a British princess if possible. Alexander was determined to live with his sweetheart. Their morganatic marriage was secretly performed but it was not kept a secret for long. He seeked and managed to gain Venizalos’ promise that the wedding would be viewed as valid and that it would not pose a threat to the dynasty.


While everything seemed to be just fine, Alexander unexpectedly died at 25 October 1920 from blood poisoning after a monkey’s bite. He was at Tatoi when he was attacted by one of the two monkeys the Greek Royals kept at the estate. From time to time there were theories that didn’t accept the version of a death caused by a monkey and saw an assassination of the dangerous( because of his popularity and cooperation with Venizelos )young king.
 
His death was a great shock to the Greek society. He has been the most favourite by the people among the Greek Monarchs, not only because it was during his reign that the country managed to accomplish a lot due to theconcord that he has guaranteed but also because his romantic love story and his marriage to a Greek girl won the hearts of the people. This love ( of the Greek people) led many to believe that if Alexander had lived Greece would have faced the humiliation of the Asia Minor disaster. Only that history cannot be written with ifs.

His name was given to the city Degeats, now Alexandroupolis, because he was the First Greek official who visited it.
 
I hope my explanation regarding the case of Marina Karella answered also your last concern.
Thanks. I figured it wasn't just a matter Greek vs. non-Greek or wealth. But it definitely seems oddly unfair that rich foreign brides, because of timing and whom they married got to share their husbands' titles and the Greek women didn't.
 
Back
Top Bottom