Future and Popularity of the Spanish Monarchy


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Many aristocratic families try probably to have nothing in common with the future Queen.

King and Queen will be top rung of social ladder. Too bad if they distance themselves from Letizia. There will be many who will take their place and the snob aristocratic families will find themselves on the opposite side of the door. Probably the very best thing that could happen to Spain.....a clean sweep on all corners. Remember a lot of those aristocratic families have caused a good bit of the economic problems in Spain today. Felipe is no dummy. He knows exactly what is going on and if he is smart he will distance himself from his father's old crowd.
 
The aristocratic families had no responsability in the economical problems of the country.
 
Reading through about the negative views of Princess Letizia and, by extension, Prince Felipe for marrying her, I find myself more than a little surprised.

Of the past, present and future royal heirs of that generation in Europe, I think Queen Mathilde and HGD Stephanie were the only aristocrats that married into the reigning family. Elsewhere in Europe, countries seem to have taken their commoner CP's to their hearts.

These countries are all historic Constitutional Monarchies whereas Spain is one generation removed from a Military Dictatorship and returned to a Constitutional Monarchy. And yet there is a hard core of people who do not think Letizia, a commoner, is "suitable" or "acceptable" as future Queen.

Are there any legitmate reasons for the vocal animosity other than noses out of joint or plain old green-eyed monster?


Overall, I think marrying commoners has been a plus for the popularity of Europe's royal heirs. By most criteria, Daniel and Mette-Marit for example were highly unsuited to be consorts of a future sovereign (exactly the opposite of an ideal candidate for the job), but they turned out later to be big assets for the royal family. Maxima and Mary were in a different category since, prior to their marriages, they were already accomplished professional women with a career of their own. Maxima, despite her controversial family background, became a model crown prince's wife and now queen consort, but I personally think the jury is still out for Mary.

As far as Letizia is concerned, I suppose the problem is not so much that she is a "commoner", but the fact she also had a "baggage" as a divorced woman and doesn't connect well with the Spanish people the way other (previously) controversial royal consorts do with their countrymen. She will also have to take the job under the shadow of a larger-than-life figure like Queen Sophia.
 
Mbruno, I agree with your assessment of Daniel of Sweden as an asset to the SRF. But in many ways Mette-Marit has been as controversial in Norway as Letizia has been in Spain.

I do not believe MM is universally considered an asset by the Norwegians.
 
Overall, I think marrying commoners has been a plus for the popularity of Europe's royal heirs. By most criteria, Daniel and Mette-Marit for example were highly unsuited to be consorts of a future sovereign (exactly the opposite of an ideal candidate for the job), but they turned out later to be big assets for the royal family. Maxima and Mary were in a different category since, prior to their marriages, they were already accomplished professional women with a career of their own. Maxima, despite her controversial family background, became a model crown prince's wife and now queen consort, but I personally think the jury is still out for Mary.

As far as Letizia is concerned, I suppose the problem is not so much that she is a "commoner", but the fact she also had a "baggage" as a divorced woman and doesn't connect well with the Spanish people the way other (previously) controversial royal consorts do with their countrymen. She will also have to take the job under the shadow of a larger-than-life figure like Queen Sophia.

I agree 100% with you!
 
Overall, I think marrying commoners has been a plus for the popularity of Europe's royal heirs. By most criteria, Daniel and Mette-Marit for example were highly unsuited to be consorts of a future sovereign (exactly the opposite of an ideal candidate for the job), but they turned out later to be big assets for the royal family. Maxima and Mary were in a different category since, prior to their marriages, they were already accomplished professional women with a career of their own. Maxima, despite her controversial family background, became a model crown prince's wife and now queen consort, but I personally think the jury is still out for Mary.

As far as Letizia is concerned, I suppose the problem is not so much that she is a "commoner", but the fact she also had a "baggage" as a divorced woman and doesn't connect well with the Spanish people the way other (previously) controversial royal consorts do with their countrymen. She will also have to take the job under the shadow of a larger-than-life figure like Queen Sophia.
Except for the first sentence I do not agree with you.
Why was Daniel more unsuited than Maxima?
Why is Mette-Marit a big asset but the jury is still out for Mary?

And IMO Queen Sophia was never seen as a larger-than-life figure until Letizia married into the family. Nor was she seen as someone who can connect well with the Spanish people.
I actually think that Letizia's "commoner" background and the fact that she was a career woman has a lot to do with the hostility against her from day 1.

And if Spain is still the macho-macho-country I experienced in the late 80s/ early 90s then the fact that there is only a female heir also plays an important role, although nobody speaks it out loudly.
 
Queen Sofia has always been very respected by the Spanish.
 
Cory, that's not true ... Queen Sofia, until she was grandmother was accused of being an excessively cold woman. When she arrived to Spain, was also criticized for being foreign or been educated in the Orthodox religion. Queen Sofia has lived quite secluded in Zarzuela, always supported by her sister and with few Spanish friends.

Queen Sofia is respected after 40 years, because she is considered a professional royal, for her social work and support to culture, for being a good representative of Spain.

As Princess, Letizia has remained in the background, now she will develop her role with a freedom and prominence that she had not.
 
Mbruno, I agree with your assessment of Daniel of Sweden as an asset to the SRF. But in many ways Mette-Marit has been as controversial in Norway as Letizia has been in Spain.

I do not believe MM is universally considered an asset by the Norwegians.

You may be right. I don't follow the Norwegian royals as closely as I follow the Dutch or Swedish royal families, so I can't tell.
 
Except for the first sentence I do not agree with you.
Why was Daniel more unsuited than Maxima?
Why is Mette-Marit a big asset but the jury is still out for Mary?

And IMO Queen Sophia was never seen as a larger-than-life figure until Letizia married into the family. Nor was she seen as someone who can connect well with the Spanish people.
I actually think that Letizia's "commoner" background and the fact that she was a career woman has a lot to do with the hostility against her from day 1.

And if Spain is still the macho-macho-country I experienced in the late 80s/ early 90s then the fact that there is only a female heir also plays an important role, although nobody speaks it out loudly.


Ricarda: I admit those are my subjective assessments, but, anyway, Queen Sofia is the daughter and brother of a king; a great-granddaughter of Queen Victoria , and even a descendant of the last German Kaiser. Having been born royal, that gives her an aura of gravitas and respectability on her own that is independent of her having married Juan Carlos.

As for Maxima and Daniel, I guess Maxima belongs to the Argentinean elite. His father was a landowner and a government minister, and she was a NY-based investment banker. Daniel's background on the other hand is low middle-class at best. Judging by those criteria only (not that they matter actually), Maxima was more suitable than Daniel.

On Mary, I must admit again it's my personal feeling. She strikes me as a "social climber", like Kate.

I know, lots of controversial statements.
 
Mbruno, I agree with your assessment of Daniel of Sweden as an asset to the SRF. But in many ways Mette-Marit has been as controversial in Norway as Letizia has been in Spain.

I do not believe MM is universally considered an asset by the Norwegians.

You are correct. Many still find MM's prior style of living and her illegitimate son extremely distasteful. Old fashion in this modern day and age. I personally think she is doing a wonderful job of supporting a future King, which is actually her primary job now.
 
Hopefully the Inauguration of Felipe will calm things down in Spain, people will be rejoicing with the accession of an new monarch and it's likely the protests will die down.
 
:previous:
Once rejoicing with the ascension of an new monarch is over, the knives will be out.

King and Queen will be top rung of social ladder. Too bad if they distance themselves from Letizia. There will be many who will take their place and the snob aristocratic families will find themselves on the opposite side of the door. Probably the very best thing that could happen to Spain.....a clean sweep on all corners. Remember a lot of those aristocratic families have caused a good bit of the economic problems in Spain today. Felipe is no dummy. He knows exactly what is going on and if he is smart he will distance himself from his father's old crowd.
The snob aristocratic families lead a comfortable life and will continue to do so. Unlike King Felipe and his spouse, they do not need to prove that they earn their taxpayer funded keep by representing the country and placate crowds.
 
Last edited:
I was a bit shocked when I heard Juan Carlos was abdicating. Fourth in just over a year, if you include the Pope. Went from 1 female heir apparent to four in a year and a half.
 
Let us focus on the ´Future of the Spanish monarchy´ and let´s not enter a competition about who is the best-worst royal. Past experiences show that such debates usually turn ugly rather quickly.
 
Ricarda: I admit those are my subjective assessments, but, anyway, Queen Sofia is the daughter and brother of a king; a great-granddaughter of Queen Victoria , and even a descendant of the last German Kaiser. Having been born royal, that gives her an aura of gravitas and respectability on her own that is independent of her having married Juan Carlos.
But that's exactly the point. IMO all that "larger than life figure"-talk is based on what Sophia IS by birth and not so much on what she DID. Really, what has she done or said in the last 40 years that makes her larger than life? She is respected and after various scandals the most popular (or rather pitied) member of the RF.
It seems to me there is so much more demanded from Letizia and the other commoners who married into the RFs.

As for Maxima and Daniel, I guess Maxima belongs to the Argentinean elite. His father was a landowner and a government minister, and she was a NY-based investment banker. Daniel's background on the other hand is low middle-class at best. Judging by those criteria only (not that they matter actually), Maxima was more suitable than Daniel.
On Mary, I must admit again it's my personal feeling. She strikes me as a "social climber", like Kate.
Well, this doesn't really belong here but my personal feeling:
Maxima may be from the Argentinian elite but because of her father's "career" she was less suitable than Daniel. She married the least attractive, most stupid and tactless of all crown princes (I can see the personal attractivity of William and Frederik and Felipe on the other hand). I am quite sure she would not have looked at WA twice if he hadn't been a member of one of the richest royal families and the heir of a monarchy with a tradition of abdication. And for her social rise she accepted the public humiliation of her father.
BUT she is an asset to her husband and her new country and they are all happy together - and for me that's all that matters in the end.

ADDED: Sorry, Marengo, I started to write this before I read your post. And since I took the Trouble I'll leave it here.
 
Last edited:
Please note that any further off topic posts will be deleted without warning
 
And if Spain is still the macho-macho-country I experienced in the late 80s/ early 90s then the fact that there is only a female heir also plays an important role, although nobody speaks it out loudly.


You mean what they need is another George the Republican Slayer? :lol:
 
Except for the first sentence I do not agree with you.
Why was Daniel more unsuited than Maxima?
Why is Mette-Marit a big asset but the jury is still out for Mary?

And IMO Queen Sophia was never seen as a larger-than-life figure until Letizia married into the family. Nor was she seen as someone who can connect well with the Spanish people.
I actually think that Letizia's "commoner" background and the fact that she was a career woman has a lot to do with the hostility against her from day 1.

I don't think so. Some people may dislike her or think she's not adequate because she's not royal and she's divorced, but that's it. If Letizia had Maxima's demeanour I assure you she would be liked here despite her backround. It's much more about how cold, stiff and bossy she seems. I think that's the main reason she doesn't connect with people, to be honest.

And if Spain is still the macho-macho-country I experienced in the late 80s/ early 90s then the fact that there is only a female heir also plays an important role, although nobody speaks it out loudly.

I don't think there's any problem with that, at all. The only "inconvenient" is that it is more urgent now to change the sucession rule in the Constitution, just in case Letizia gave birth to a boy. But that rule change was bound happen anyway, with or without a female heir. Everyone knows and agrees that rule has to be changed the sooner the better and there's really no debate or doubt about it.
If anything, people are upset that rule exists and everyone that I've heard talk about it thinks it is very unfair to Elena, so no.

And in no way that is a reason to dislike Letizia. :ermm:
 
Last edited:
Goodness! I would think it outrageous that some people do not like Letizia because she gave birth to no male heirs! That would be Felipe's fault!! Basic biology...the man decides the sex of the baby, not the female!!
Like it or not...I don't see any more children for Felipe and Letizia given her age and now they have increased responsibilities as the King and Queen of Spain!
 
Goodness! I would think it outrageous that some people do not like Letizia because she gave birth to no male heirs! That would be Felipe's fault!! Basic biology...the man decides the sex of the baby, not the female!!
Like it or not...I don't see any more children for Felipe and Letizia given her age and now they have increased responsibilities as the King and Queen of Spain!
You know, is the Macho Spanish society. I wonder if some think that we still need the permission of our father or husband to get a driving license. What a stupidity, we only need it to study at the University :p
 
Goodness! I would think it outrageous that some people do not like Letizia because she gave birth to no male heirs! That would be Felipe's fault!! Basic biology...the man decides the sex of the baby, not the female!!
Like it or not...I don't see any more children for Felipe and Letizia given her age and now they have increased responsibilities as the King and Queen of Spain!

I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic :lol: But I was precisely saying that noone dislikes her because of that. I mean if you suggested that in year 1275, maybe, but we are way past that point by now. :lol:
 
You know, is the Macho Spanish society. I wonder if some think that we still need the permission of our father or husband to get a driving license. What a stupidity, we only need it to study at the University :p

Is it STILL that way in Spain??? :eek:
 
Many Catholics won't support maybe the future royal couple because of the choice not to have a Mass on the first day of the reign.

The Spanish Catholics should really think if a man that starts his reign not asking God's blessing and forgetting the traditions of the country and of his own Family deserves to be supported as King.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Many Catholics won't support maybe the future royal couple because of the choice not to have a Mass on the first day of the reign.

I guess if you are looking for an excuse to not support your Head of State, this will be as good as any other.
 
Cory, you are really upset about this whole secular state/no grand mass with all the pomp and circumstance situation, aren't you?:whistling:
 
Probably some Catholics will remember the claims of HRH the Duke of Parma to the Throne seeing what's going on.
 
Back
Top Bottom