Preferred Wives For William and Harry

[Lumutqueen]

How Charlotte Casiraghi for Harry? I think they'd be quite the couple.

I never thought of that. They would make rather a good pairing i think
And Prince William and Princess Madeline would be good i believe.

 

[Empress Merel]

I always thought that if Charlotte would end up with a British royal it should be Harry.
Harry is fun-loving, loves horses, is bright, handsome (Unlike William). I think that match could work.
Not William and Charlotte. I feel Charlotte is way out of William' league(She would outshine him with her beauty). William seems to be the opposite from Harry, a whole lot more serious. Also I think the role of queen isn't for Charlotte. Maybe for princess Madeleine.

Prince William & Princess Madeleine
Prince Harry & Charlotte Casiraghi.

Doesn't sound that bad, doesn't it ladies (and gentlemen)

 

[Jacknch]

If only William and Harry started mixing with the same circles as Madeleine and Charlotte anything is possible! Does anyone know if William and Harry are friendly or socialise with other young royals from Europe or further afield? I'm sure being closeted up with the London set all the time isn't good for them!

 

[Kotroman]

1. Prince William of Wales and Princess Madelaine of Sweden could be a great couple, but they would not be allowed to marry because Princess Madelaine would lose her succession rights (and line of succession to the Swedish throne is too short already)

2. Prince Henry of Wales and Miss Charlotte Casiraghi could marry only if she would renounce her Catholic faith and I doubt that will happen because she is going to become a Princess of Monaco if her mother ascends the throne like I hope she will

I'm still for Prince William of Wales and Princess Theodora of Greece and Denmark, for the same reasons listed on the previous page...

 

[Ella Kay]

If only William and Harry started mixing with the same circles as Madeleine and Charlotte anything is possible! Does anyone know if William and Harry are friendly or socialise with other young royals from Europe or further afield? I'm sure being closeted up with the London set all the time isn't good for them!

If I remember correctly, we've seen the York girls out with some German princes (from the Thurn und Taxis family, maybe?), but not William and Harry. William is the godfather to one of Prince Pavlos of Greece's children, but I can't recall hearing about him socializing with many European royals.

 

[Lumutqueen]

1. Prince William of Wales and Princess Madelaine of Sweden could be a great couple, but they would not be allowed to marry because Princess Madelaine would lose her succession rights (and line of succession to the Swedish throne is too short already)

Why would Madelaine loose her succesion rights?
x

 

[Kotroman]

Because people in the line of succession to the Swedish throne are not allowed to marry foreign dynasts. Today, personal union between culturally different kingdoms is not welcome as it was many centuries ago, so a woman who is third in line for the Swedish throne probably wouldn't keep her succession rights if she decided to marry a man who is second in line for the British throne.

 

[Saturn]

Has anyone mentioned this great combination: Princess Theodora of Greece and Denmark becoming Princess William of Wales It would be great! Why?

I agree with you, Prince William and Princess Theodora could be a great couple. Besides Theodora was born in Britain and speaks English better than Greek. She has a great pedigree, daughter of the King of Greece, niece of the Queen of Denmark and also of the King of Spain. Britain would have again the best pedigree of all European Monarchies.
I'm sure the media would respect Theodora as she is already a Princess. I still remember that before Prince Felipe married Letizia, the media respect the SRF, but after marring a commoner, they started criticizing the new couple and all the Royal family.

 

[Warren]

If I remember correctly, we've seen the York girls out with some German princes (from the Thurn und Taxis family, maybe).

I think you're referring to Count Nikolai von Bismarck, born 1986. He is a friend of Princess Beatrice and took her 18th birthday photo - see story.
Count Nikolai is also a friend of Pricess Eugenie - see photo.

 

[Ella Kay]

Yes, that's the one I was thinking of. Thanks, Warren!

 

[Lumutqueen]

Because people in the line of succession to the Swedish throne are not allowed to marry foreign dynasts. Today, personal union between culturally different kingdoms is not welcome as it was many centuries ago, so a woman who is third in line for the Swedish throne probably wouldn't keep her succession rights if she decided to marry a man who is second in line for the British throne.

Did that mean Queen Ingrid lost hers when she married King Frederik?
x

 

[Kotroman]

Ingrid of Sweden never had succession rights to the throne of Sweden because she was a woman. When Salic law was abolished, the succession rights were granted only to the uncle and descendants of King Carl XVI Gustaf. Ingrid of Sweden was only in line of succession to the British throne

 

[Prince of Chota]

There was a time when I dreamt of "SweDenmark" (CP Frederick marrying CP Victoria). Neither country would lose a letter of its English name. LOL.

Are we talking dynasts only for William and Henry? Or just princesses (including mediatised and abolished thrones)?

 

[Prince of Chota]

I don't think that marrying commoners would be the death sentence for the British royals. Perhaps somewhere on the continent it is looked down upon, but there has never really been much of a demand for royal-only brides in the UK. The closest thing was the importation of a German-style monarchy under the early Hanoverians (and with all their affairs and carrying on, I doubt there was too much respect for married life beyond Queens Caroline and Charlotte, who didn't rank too highly by birth, themselves). English monarchs have most often married members of the British nobility (who, unless peeresses in their own right, are commoners). So a Kate or Chelsea wouldn't exactly signal the end of monarchy in Britain.

 

[Kotroman]

So a Kate or Chelsea wouldn't exactly signal the end of monarchy in Britain.

Of course it wouldn't! English and Scottish kings married often non-royals. It's just that a woman who is already a princess wouldn't have to adapt to the royal lifestyle and royal duties and she would be more respected by the press.

Are we talking dynasts only for William and Henry? Or just princesses (including mediatised and abolished thrones)?

No, princess of no kingdom also count (they're even better, because the possibility of personal union is smaller). That's why I suggested Princess Theodora of Greece and Denmark.

 

[Ella Kay]

It's just that a woman who is already a princess wouldn't have to adapt to the royal lifestyle and royal duties and she would be more respected by the press.

Honestly, I tend to doubt that any woman who marries into the royal family, even if she is royal herself, will get an easier ride from the press. They seem to be equal-opportunity intruders and scandalizers these days. I doubt an HRH or a tiara would keep them from finding stories that up the circulation.

 

[muriel]

Honestly, I tend to doubt that any woman who marries into the royal family, even if she is royal herself, will get an easier ride from the press. They seem to be equal-opportunity intruders and scandalizers these days. I doubt an HRH or a tiara would keep them from finding stories that up the circulation.

Quite right, and we have the example of Princess Michael of Kent, who despite having royal blood has not had an easy time with the Press. Or was that because of some of her antics??

 

[Kotroman]

I don't know... I always thought that a real princess (not Princess Stephanie of Monaco kind of princess) would behave more appropriately (e.g. wear longer skirts so that we don't see her underwear).

 

[muriel]

I don't know... I always thought that a real princess (not Princess Stephanie of Monaco kind of princess) would behave more appropriately (e.g. wear longer skirts so that we don't see her underwear).

.... and I am sure that if Kate were to be a Princess, she too, would be more careful. As of now she is a private citizen, and frankly oif an embarassing shot has been taken, it is for the editors of the tabloids to decide not to use it.

 

[Tilia C.]

I don't know... I always thought that a real princess (not Princess Stephanie of Monaco kind of princess) would behave more appropriately (e.g. wear longer skirts so that we don't see her underwear).

If royal blood and upbringing would guarantee approriate behaviour we wouldn't hear the kind of news we so often hear about prince Harry.We even saw his pink underwear lately!
No, I guess Wills has stick with Kate. He can't leave her to marry a girl of the perfect pedigree, or we would be caught in a time warp and witness the next royal 'ménange à trois'.

 

[muriel]

If royal blood and upbringing would guarantee approriate behaviour we wouldn't hear the kind of news we so often hear about prince Harry.We even saw his pink underwear lately!

I take it that Harry's boxers peeping out of the top of his jeans is also objectionable to some. Have you looked around recently...... most young people seem to be doing that. And I am not talking about having ones jeams 2/3 of the way down ones rear end!!

 

[pius x]

Charlotte Casiraghi is true Catholic and I don't think she will give up her faith like someone else we know.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I don't think that marrying commoners would be the death sentence for the British royals...

I have been doing some research and thought you might be interested to know that before Charles married Diana the last acknowledged either heir apparent or monarch who actually married a non-royal personage was Henry VII.

Going in reverse order, and only dealing with the heir apparent and/or monarch at the time of their marriage these are the marriages:

Edward VII married Princess Alexandra of Denmark
Queen Victoria married Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha
George IV married Princess Caroline of Brunswick
George III married Princess Charlotte of Mecklingburg-Strelitz
Charles II married Princess Catherine of Braganza
Charles I married Princess Henrietta of France
Mary I married Philip II of Spain
Henry VIII married Princess Katherine of Aragon
Henry VII married Elizabeth Woodville.

So since the late 1400s until the late 1900s the monarch or heir apparent who married did so to someone of royal birth.

Isn't it amazing though how many of the monarchs didn't marry when they were either the monarch or heir apparent but even then most of them conducted royal marriages.

Edward VI - didn't marry
Elizabeth I - didn't marry
James I and VI - Princess Anne of Denmark
Mary II - married William of Orange and shared the throne with her
Anne - married Prince George of Denmark
George I - married Doreathea of Celle (daughter of a Duke born an HH)
George II - married Princess Caroline of Brandenburg-Ansbach
William IV - married Princess Adelaide of Saxe-Meinengen
George V - married Princess Mary of Teck (was 2nd in line at the time and therefore not heir apparent)

That list leaves James II and George VI as the only monarchs who married non-royal spouses since Henry VIII. James IIs first wife was Anne Hyde but his second was Princess Mary of Modena and thus a royal wife. George VI's spouse was the redoubtable Elizabeth Bowes-Lyons.

To say that they British royals haven't been as insisting on royal spouses doesn't hold up under scrutiny. Since Henry VII married Elizabeth of York there have been 22 monarchs - 2 never married, 2 married more than once and even then of those 8 wives 3 were royal, thus excluding Henry VIII's multiple wives only 2 spouses since the late 1400s have been non-royal.

 

[zembla]

If she isn't related to him in some way, Mary Charteris would be cute with Harry...I know she's related to Daphne Guinness and is part of the aristocracy. She's also gorg.

 

[Myself1995]

Prince William & Princess Madeleine
Prince Harry & Charlotte Casiraghi.

See, I like this combination, too. I wonder if they've even met either girl? ( not that there's anything wrong with Kate ... )

Princess Madeleine
http://oursurprisingworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/princess_madeleine_of_sweden_01.jpg

Charlotte Casiraghi.
http://static.rp-online.de/layout/showbilder/14987-SD51-221107-pih4381ae570b0c.jpg

 

[4Pam]

I love the Charlotte and Harry combo!! But I wonder of she'll give up her Catholic faith to marry into "The Firm." But would she have to since Harry isn't the heir?

 

[Myself1995]

Good question - I don't know. Not that any of them will ever get together or anything.

 

[Russophile]

Good question - I don't know. Not that any of them will ever get together or anything.

I believe that if she didn't, she or he or both would be out of the line of succession. That's really a question for Warren, Branchg, I think Iluvbertie knows that as well.

 

[Marsel]

If William and Harry married Catholic ladies, they would loose their place in the Line of the Succession.

1701 Act of Settlement specifies that anyone who is a Roman Catholic or married to a Roman Catholic, are barred from ascending the Throne ‘for ever’.
Autumn Kelly, the then fiancée of Peter Phillips, was a Roman Catholic. If she hadn’t converted to the Anglican faith prior to the wedding, Peter would have lost her place in the Line of the Succession.



1701 Act of Settlement is discriminative only against Catholics, so in theory, Princess Madeline wouldn’t have to give up her faith. However, it is highly unlikely that any woman, who marries either William or Harry, doesn't convert to the Anglican faith.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I love the Charlotte and Harry combo!! But I wonder of she'll give up her Catholic faith to marry into "The Firm." But would she have to since Harry isn't the heir?

Charlotte would most certainly have to convert away from the Roman Catholic faith or Harry would lose his place in the line of succession.

Any children would keep theirs until they were either baptised RC or confirmed RC themselves.

Prince Micheal of Kent lost his place when he married Princess Michael of Kent but their children have been raised Anglican and so Lord Freddie and Lady Gabriella are in the line of succession. The same situation exists for Ernst of Hannover who lost his place on marrying Caroline of Monaco but their daughter is being raised Protestant and so is still in the line of succession.

Harry's position as 3rd in line makes no difference. He is an heir to the Electress Sophia of Hannover and as such is subject to the Act of Settlement of 1701 which bars any person marrying a Roman Catholic or converting to Roman Catholicism from claiming the British throne and thus they are excluded from list of people in the line of succession.

The Act of course only applies at the time of succession, and to the monarch thereafter, it is really a mute point.