The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #81  
Old 09-10-2018, 08:06 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 428
Sophie Rhys-Jones's wedding tiara was so horrible that it doesn't look as if the Queen wanted her as a daughter-in-law.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 09-10-2018, 08:11 PM
KMD KMD is offline
Commoner
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 31
Soooo, with many of Europe’s Royals having insisted on marrying the spouse of their choice, despite their family’s wishes, have most marriages remained intact? Joachim and Marthe Louise’s marriages didn’t survive, and as for the Windsor’s, well!!!!!!
Time will tell if the rest survive, despite the opposition.
Have any Crown Princes/ Princesses divorced, or at that level do they just have to stick it out?
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 09-10-2018, 08:16 PM
KMD KMD is offline
Commoner
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 31
But, Susan, I read that now Sophie is the one closest to the Queen, a regular riding companion. Despite the tiara!
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 09-10-2018, 08:21 PM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMD View Post
Soooo, with many of Europe’s Royals having insisted on marrying the spouse of their choice, despite their family’s wishes, have most marriages remained intact? Joachim and Marthe Louise’s marriages didn’t survive, and as for the Windsor’s, well!!!!!!
Time will tell if the rest survive, despite the opposition.
Have any Crown Princes/ Princesses divorced, or at that level do they just have to stick it out?
Charles divorced...
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 09-10-2018, 08:23 PM
KMD KMD is offline
Commoner
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 31
Yes indeed. Any others?
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 09-10-2018, 08:24 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 428
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMD View Post
But, Susan, I read that now Sophie is the one closest to the Queen, a regular riding companion. Despite the tiara!
Maybe the Queen accepts her NOW. The tiara still indicates that Sophie Rhys-Jones was not overly welcomed into the House of Windsor. The tiara was a disgrace; it looked like forgotten pieces stuck together.
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 09-10-2018, 08:44 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 10,583
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMD View Post
Thank you for your responses. So it would seem that of the current European Royal Families, only Queen Mathilde and Princess Mary did not have objections to their marriage. I think there were some objections to Princess Sonia of Sweden and Princess Marthe Louise as well, though I don’t have specific evidence. Is marrying a commoner the most common objection? What are the others?
There was no objection/difficulty whatsoever in Luxembourg in 2012 when the Heir, HGD Guillaume, married Countess Stephanie de Lannoy.

So no, Mathilde and Mary are not the only recent Royal brides who have married without controversy.

ETA: I also don't remember any public opposition to Prince William"s decision to marry Kate Middleton. But just this week a British tabloid ...was it "Express"? reported that the Duchess of Cornwall initially (privately )did not approve of Kate but eventually came around.

Not sure how reliable Express is, but I don't believe their story for several reasons.
__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena

"The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice". Martin Luther King Jr. 1929-1968
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 09-10-2018, 08:47 PM
Queen Claude's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 1,176
IMO Sophie's tiara is more indicative of the Queen's lack of taste when it comes to jewelry design than her not approving of Sophie.
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 09-10-2018, 09:12 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muhler View Post
And I think it's necessary to have a very pragmatic view on who you marry when you are a senior royal.
With all possible respect for Meghan personally, her family is a nightmare scenario for other royal families out there. And they are IMO going to make even more sure that future spouses will be vetted even more carefully. - And if they don't their governments will!
It's difficult to say how many sweethearts have been given the thumbs-down by governments, but it may be more than we think.
And while you can wear your family down and marry someone who is considered less than ideal, it's another matter to get a no from a government and as an extension of that, the parliament, in a given country.

As such I think the day when an heir could get away with marrying almost anyone he/she loved has come - and gone.
I take the exact opposite view on future royal marriages actually. While Meghan’s family might be embarrassing, it’s nowhere near a legitimate reason for denial of permission to marry. Now a few decades ago, she’d be considered not suitable as royal spouse, but those times are gone. Unless it’s a situation like Mabel and Frisco or more serious, I doubt government or monarch would deny permission.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 09-10-2018, 09:15 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Claude View Post
IMO Sophie's tiara is more indicative of the Queen's lack of taste when it comes to jewelry design than her not approving of Sophie.
Do we know for sure The Queen designed the tiara? I believe Edward designed those pearl earrings and necklace, and that was about on the same level of ugliness. If anything, the Queen showed them love by allowing them to do this to her jewels.
Reply With Quote
  #91  
Old 09-10-2018, 09:31 PM
Queen Claude's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 1,176
I don't know "for sure" but the components of the tiara date back to Queen Victoria's time so I don't think that Queen would give her son carte blanche. I tend to think that the Queen had a hand in it because other jewels that have been created on QEII's watch ranged from meh to unattractive, so Sophie's tiara is not an outlier. For the record, I think that Sophie's tiara is more meh than unattractive.
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 09-10-2018, 09:32 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Waterford, United States
Posts: 2,862
KMD- thank you for this interesting new thread.
__________________
"If you look for the bad in people expecting to find it, you surely will.”

Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 09-10-2018, 11:59 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Tampere, Finland
Posts: 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biri View Post
Princess Mabel was definitely given "thumbs-down"; however, Prince Johan Friso married her.

And he was dropped from succession line.


Just wondering has in modern era (let's say after 1950) any member of royal family lost his place in succession line due non-approved marriage.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 09-11-2018, 01:04 AM
KMD KMD is offline
Commoner
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 31
I’m new to this, but finding it fascinating. What was the problem with Princess Mabel?
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 09-11-2018, 01:24 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Waterford, United States
Posts: 2,862
As I recall, Princess Elizabeth’s parents did not totally approve of her choice! But the marriage took place and has managed to endure for 70 years and counting.
__________________
"If you look for the bad in people expecting to find it, you surely will.”

Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 09-11-2018, 02:59 AM
Muhler's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 14,296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
1 Interestingly, the requirement for Benedikte's children was to grow up in Denmark to remain in line to the throne while at the same time it was expected from her to marry a foreigner (preferably royal or noble).

2 Currently there are quite a few questionable people married into the royal families of Europe. Although I personally would prefer people to only be 'judged' on their own merits and not on their families. What makes you think that this leniency is going away?
(I've allowed myself to add numbers to your quote.)

1) I can't say what was required back then. But Benedikte's children are not listed as being in the Line of Succession. I think it was very much on Benedikte's insistence they maintained a close affiliation with DK. After all QMII and PH very quickly produced an heir and a spare.

2) Very brutal: In the interest of the country. - And in the interest of the family.
The primary working royals in any monarchy is the monarch and the heir and the spare and not least their spouses.
No one, as in no one at all, not even republicans, wish to see their monarchy turned into a soap opera. There is too much at stake.
Apart from personifying the country internally, they also personify their country abroad, not least in regards to diplomacy, and export. (I know the BRF don't focus much on promoting the export, but mainly on general good PR, but other monarchies do!) You want your royals to present the best possible image of your country.

That means:
1) No divorce. - It happens, but we'd prefer it didn't. So think very careful before marrying!
2) Be intelligent and well educated enough not to say or do something stupid. - It happens, but don't make a habit of it.
3) Have people skills. - Be naturally nice, extrovert and don't have any psychopathic traits.
4) Have an uninteresting past. - Your past shouldn't be a story. So no drugs, preferably don't have any children, no criminal record, no shady dealings financially, no extremists or criminals among your past friends. And so on...
5) Have a strong psyche. - No story about mental breakdowns or issues. It's hard enough as it is. So don't do a Masako!
6) Have a discreet and respectable family who can keep their mouths shut. - Their purpose in life is to remain in the background and look happy.
7) Be diplomatic. - Keep your personal opinion about everything to yourself, unless you have an OK from the government. So keep your activist traits in check, please! And close your Twitter account...
8) Have no ambitions of your own but to serve your country and support the royal family. - No Wallis, please!
And so on.
- I think you get the picture.

Failing on one of the above is unfortunate but can be acceptable.
Failing on two is problematic. A "The government is happy for the young couple and we wouldn't interfere with the internal affairs of the royal family, but..."
Failing on three is a "We won't recommend" from the government.
Failing on more than three of the above is a "We cannot endorse" from the government!
- An important job of any government is to help protect the royals from themselves.

In this world today, with Google translate and the Internet. Anything negative goes worldwide in hours. Not to mention that the world opinion has become much less tolerant, much more politically correct and much more sensitive to the slightest affront be that perceived or real.
On top of that nationalism is on the rise. Embarrassing your country is much less something to "see the funny side of" than it was just a couple of decades ago.

Queen Maxima. The ideal spouse. Intelligent, extrovert, great people skills, well educated, diplomatic - but there is the thing about her father... That was very controversial when she got married. Would she get through the filter today?
Meghan. Extrovert, intelligent, discreet, pretty uninteresting personal past. Albeit with some activist tendencies and divorced. - But a most unfortunate family! I think Meghan can be very happy her family live on another continent! And for Brexit...
Otherwise... - "Her Majesty's government will advise more time for reflection before considering a marriage."
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 09-11-2018, 03:13 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 10,967
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR76 View Post
That example is exactly the same given by The Queen herself so I'd say it's a valid one. According to what she wrote in a book I can't remember the name off a few years ago her parents put no pressure on her to find a royal husband but that they preferred him to be foreign.

That said had either The Queen or any of her sons fallen in love with a suitable Dane I find it very hard to believe that they wouldn't have gotten permission to marry. Neither Frederik, Ingrid, Daisy or Henri were/is rigid and/or stuck up.
This is the same stance held by Queen Beatrix but in the end only the Prince of Orange chose a foreign partner. The reasons were the same: no past in the Netherlands, distance to the public (so no "Maxima or Mary were our roommates and we have juicy stories to tell). Australia and Argentina are far, far away.
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 09-11-2018, 03:27 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 10,967
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biri View Post
Princess Mabel was definitely given "thumbs-down"; however, Prince Johan Friso married her.
Princess Mabel was definitely not thumbed down by the Queen. From the very beginning she was visibly close to Mabel and presented her as "an exceptionally gifted lady".

It was the Prime Minister who was not willing to offer and defend a Bill of Consent to the States-General (Parliament) because the couple "have not been complete in their information" after press discovered that as a young lady Mabel and a friend were guests at the sail yacht of a murdered drugs criminal.

The marriage simply went on. Without Bill of Consent. Possibly Prince Friso was not even unlucky at all with this because he was now free from royal limitations and made a very good career as entrepreneur and businessman. He left his widow and his two daughters behind as multi-millionaire ladies.
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 09-11-2018, 03:38 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 10,967
Quote:
Originally Posted by Friedrich Karl II View Post
And he was dropped from succession line.


Just wondering has in modern era (let's say after 1950) any member of royal family lost his place in succession line due non-approved marriage.
In the Netherlands Parliament has to approve a royal marriage. This means that the Government offers a Bill of Consent, there is a reading in commission and then a plenary debate, like for every other bill.

After 1950 Princess Irene and Princess Christina (daughters of Queen Juliana), Prince Friso (son of Queen Beatrix), Prince Pieter-Christiaan and Prince Floris (sons of Princess Margriet) married without a Bill of Consent.

As a result all of them ceased to be a member of the Royal House and lost their place in the line of succession. It is important to be precise: never any Bill of Consent was voted down. In the named examples there simply was no Bill of Consent offered, so Parliament had no any say.
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 09-11-2018, 04:47 AM
Muhler's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 14,296
I think we should look at the process for a moment.

It's no secret that when Frederik wanted to propose to Mary he mentioned it to his chief of staff who at the time was his closest confidante.
It's no secret either that the Danish embassy in Australia made inquiries about Mary. That goes through the Foreign Ministry, which means the government was unofficially noticed.
I'm also very certain that Mary at some point had a talk with a senior court official, about whether she had any skeletons in her closet. So that a strategy could be prepared if they ever came out. - And perhaps also to check if she was willing to tell everything? - "Anything in my past? Noo, nothing at all." Not mentioning her little prank about cutting off the heads of fifteen budgies with a pair of scissors, putting the heads on lollypop sticks and planting them in the ground in front of the local kindergarten when she was 22.

Once the background check was complete and QMII had done her personal assessment of Mary, then Frederik proposed. Of that I'm certain.
Then the government was officially asked to give it's consent and the engagement could be announced. - With the delighted PM telling the public that the government happily gave it's consent and anyway they wouldn't dream about opposing the marriage, because that's a private matter within the royal family. It's a mere formality - and happy days are here again...
That actually pretty much sums up what the PM said at both Alexandra, Mary and our Marie's engagements being announced.

Then the whole matter was laid before the Parliament for a vote. Don't know how it is in other countries, but in DK it's tradition that the politicians never vote against a recommendation/bill by the government in the Parliament when it concerns the DRF. It is expected that any problems are solved before it gets to this point.
If it's a no go, it shouldn't even get to this point. That's a failure by both the DRF and the government. Mary should have got a "dear John" letter from Frederik before it got this far.

So what happens when there is a stand-off? - It's pretty difficult to avoid it going public if it's the heir, who won't back down.
The first thing that springs to mind is a "compromise" where the royal in question "voluntarily" give up his/her place in the succession.
That's most annoying when it's the spare! But IMO no particular problem when it's anyone under the spare.
- In that way everyone are happy - at least publicly...
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


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
Shortest Royal Marriages HMTLove23 Royal Weddings General Discussion 37 01-21-2021 05:22 AM
Royal-Royal Marriages Today Hereditary Mapmaker Royalty Past, Present, and Future 124 11-25-2019 01:09 AM
Royal Marriages: Biggest Age Difference HMTLove23 Royalty Past, Present, and Future 29 01-09-2015 07:12 PM
European/Japan royal marriages Australian Imperial Family of Japan 37 03-19-2013 07:32 PM
The Royal Marriages Act of 1772 and Royal Marriages branchg British Royals 99 12-31-2012 09:24 PM




Popular Tags
american archie mountbatten-windsor background story baptism birth britain britannia british royal family british royals brownbitcoinqueen camilla camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles carolin china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing commonwealth countries countess of snowdon customs doll dresses dubai duchess of sussex duke of sussex earl of snowdon edward vii family tree general news thread george vi gradenigo gustaf vi adolf hello! highgrove history hochberg house of windsor jack brooksbank jewellery książ castle line of succession list of rulers luxembourg meghan markle monarchy nepal nepalese royal jewels pless prince constantijn prince harry princess alexia (2005 -) princess chulabhorn walailak princess of orange princess ribha queen consort queen elizabeth ii queen maxima royal ancestry royal jewels royalty of taiwan solomon j solomon speech sussex suthida swedish queen taiwan thai royal family tradition uae customs united states united states of america wales


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:26 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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