Royal Women with Illegitimate Children

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria

I hope it is clear that I do not represent myself as never being wrong. However, as the concept that the House of Wettin continues to have an official part in legislating for the federal republic of Germany (as that is the part of my post which you quoted and refer to as wrong) is contrary to my previous understanding, I would appreciate a reference in addition to the bare statement that I am wrong.

ETA: As a reference for my own statement, here is a European Union court ruling noting that titles of nobility, as such, are abolished and their descent, as names, is regulated by "the German Law on personal status".

I don't think JR76 is arguing that the House of Wettin has the power to change the family name laws of the Federal Republic of Germany. In other words, the House of Wettin cannot prevent Xenia from using the surname Prinzessin von Sachsen if the law entitles her to do so. However, his point was that, as an internal and totally private matter, the head of the Royal House can decide whether she is a member of the said house or not regardless of the family name she carries.



The fact that the Royal House is not legally acknowledged by the Republic, except in the form of a family name, doesn't mean that the Royal House is extinct or no longer exists, as most monarchists/legitimists would normally argue.

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by Mbruno

I don't think JR76 is arguing that the House of Wettin has the power to change the family name laws of the Federal Republic of Germany. In other words, the House of Wettin cannot prevent Xenia from using the surname Prinzessin von Sachsen if the law entitles her to do so. However, his point was that, as an internal and totally private matter, the head of the Royal House can decide whether she is a member of the said house or not regardless of the family name she carries.



The fact that the Royal House is not legally acknowledged by the Republic, except in the form of a family name, doesn't mean that the Royal House is extinct or no longer exists, as most monarchists/legitimists would normally argue.

The comment of mine which JR76 took issue with stated "the House of Wettin is a private family" with no regulatory powers, and not that it ceased to exist, and was made in reply to a post saying that Xenia and her sister "are most definitely not princesses". Therefore, my understanding is that his argument extends further than what you have written, although it is possible that my understanding is wrong, of course.

[Troy Thompson]

What I read into JR76's point is that he was saying that you're wrong in conflating the name and title. Under the current legal regime in Germany, one may possess Prinzessin von Sachsen as a surname, but not as a state-recognized title.


Having the surname Prinzessin von Sachsen, in itself, no more makes a person a princess than Martin Luther King, Jr.'s surname made him a king.

[Troy Thompson]

Originally Posted by victor1319

This Xenia girl of Saxonia is royal by name and blood (the mother is always and at least sure...).

Having royal blood is an inane criterion. Yes, she has royal blood; in some quantity, so do all other Europeans, probably all Asians, and most, if not all, Africans (and including, for this purpose, residents of the Americas, Australia, etc. who are of European, Asian, and African extract as Europeans, Asians, and Africans).

[Tatiana Maria]

A prevalent argument in opposition to the descent of family names or titles through a maternal line is that the "blood-line" is allegedly broken. I suppose Victor's allusion was to that, given his reference to maternal certainty.

Originally Posted by Troy Thompson

What I read into JR76's point is that he was saying that you're wrong in conflating the name and title. Under the current legal regime in Germany, one may possess Prinzessin von Sachsen as a surname, but not as a state-recognized title.

I should perhaps have addressed it with more clarity, but I agreed with this point in post #57:

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria

Titles are recognized by the republic in the form of surnames. I suppose you refer to the fact that titles are not recognized in the form of titles, but in that case, the same applies to the "legitimate" members of the House of Wettin.

Originally Posted by Troy Thompson

Having the surname Prinzessin von Sachsen, in itself, no more makes a person a princess than Martin Luther King, Jr.'s surname made him a king.

German surnames such as Prinzessin von Sachsen are, however, distinguished from the common English surname King by their descent from the state-recognized titles of the monarchies reigning before 1919, and their continued usage as unofficial titles in German society.

[victor1319]

Thank you, Tatiana Maria #65!

Plus: Where is the line to draw? Only marriaged couples have legitimate children? What is a "real" marriage, the one in the church? (btw I did it always find amusing, how fast the nobility changes from one denomination into another, when they can rise in the ranks by marriage - so, hardcore "spirituality" seems to be not very widespread in this strata.)

Now can one say, like Troy Thompson #64, that we are all royals, what is a nice idea(!) and/or that royalty plays no role anymore... but we are not living at "the end of history" (Francis Fukuyama)! We will see, what the future brings and how the old families and their offspring will do.

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by victor1319

Plus: Where is the line to draw? Only marriaged couples have legitimate children? What is a "real" marriage, the one in the church? (btw I did it always find amusing, how fast the nobility changes from one denomination into another, when they can rise in the ranks by marriage - so, hardcore "spirituality" seems to be not very widespread in this strata.)

The one legally recognized in their country. Which in some cases could be a combined civil/church wedding and in other cases would require a civil wedding (any subsequent religious wedding does not add to the legality of the marriage). And for many royal and noble families for dynastic purposes it would also require approval by the head of the house.

[victor1319]

Originally Posted by Somebody

The one legally recognized in their country. Which in some cases could be a combined civil/church wedding and in other cases would require a civil wedding (any subsequent religious wedding does not add to the legality of the marriage). And for many royal and noble families for dynastic purposes it would also require approval by the head of the house.

Yep, but what, if this Xenia of Saxonia girl in question gets pregnant by a super-billionaire and owns after this not only a title but a castle too - in Saxonia! And a large forrest! And horses - horses are important!/s

Unlike the until then real house?

Then the real nobles of the house of Saxonia look like what? Imposters?

I mean, we live in the third millenium after Christ (and His father and mother were not married either)...

[Somebody]

Not sure what you are trying to get at... It seems the nobility is quite clear among themselves who 'belong' and who 'don't belong' - and wealth is not the main criterion; recognized marriages are.

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by victor1319

Yep, but what, if this Xenia of Saxonia girl in question gets pregnant by a super-billionaire and owns after this not only a title but a castle too - in Saxonia! And a large forrest! And horses - horses are important!/s

Unlike the until then real house?

Then the real nobles of the house of Saxonia look like what? Imposters?

I mean, we live in the third millenium after Christ (and His father and mother were not married either)...

Being royal has nothing to do with owning a castle, or horses, or having.a lot of money. Royalty is either acquired by birth or by marriage. Either way, a legally recognized marriage or being born of such type of union are normally required.

[Troy Thompson]

One way to look at it would be that, with the abolition of the German monarchy and the abolition of state recognition of royal and noble titles, the royal and noble houses of Germany effectively became, in addition to being families, private societies that have the right to determine the qualifications of their own members and how membership is attained. While the German state recognizes words such as Prinzessin von Sachsen as surnames, the actual titles have effectively become titles awarded from within the houses to their members, such that no one is a Princess of Saxony, by title, and no one is a member of the House of Wettin, unless the House of Wettin says they are.

Wealth does not matter at all. The only way one becomes a member of the House of Wettin is to be born into it or to marry into it, and even then only under the circumstances determined according to the house laws—In particular, this means that the children of (suo jure) female members of the House of Wettin do not get membership ever (unless the father was also a member of the House of Wettin), and the children of male members are disqualified if they are illegitimate or if the marriage to which they were born was unequal.

It's snobbish, sexist, and steeped in all kinds of backwardness, but that's what you get when you have a society that's organized on the basis of 19th Century Central European aristocratic norms.

[victor1319]

Originally Posted by Troy Thompson

It's snobbish, sexist, and steeped in all kinds of backwardness, but that's what you get when you have a society that's organized on the basis of 19th Century Central European aristocratic norms.

Yep, you are right and as you said "unless the House of Wettin says" so, the illegitimate Xenia from the example is no real Princess.

But I am willing to bet and the history proves it, if enough monies come into play, she will be recognized, adopted, made a decent member of the house, whatever.

And why not? She is the daughter of a real Princess after all.

[Troy Thompson]

I don't think money would ever change things. The old European feudal elite has always snobbishly looked down on the new capitalist elite, seeing even the wealthiest of the haute bourgeoisie as nothing more than vulgar and ostentatious nouveau riche, entirely lacking in proper breeding and virtue.

The only thing that I think would have made the German houses change their ways would have been the sort of political pressure that could have only been possible if, rather than overthrowing the German monarchy entirely, the November Revolution instead more firmly implemented parliamentary superiority. There would have likely been a decade thereafter during which the SPD either controlled the government in its own right, or as the leading part of a coalition with the DDP and the DZP. If that happened to have occurred, the SPD would have, as soon as the war was over, probably started taking aim at every manifestation of misogyny and discrimination against illegitimate children in the house laws and laws of succession of the German houses and states.

[Denville]

She is illegitimate, which means she may have royal blood but she cant have royal status. And since the German monarchy is long dead it seems academic...

[theroyalfly]

Originally Posted by Denville

She is illegitimate, which means she may have royal blood but she cant have royal status. And since the German monarchy is long dead it seems academic...

I couldn't agree more.

[victor1319]

Originally Posted by Troy Thompson

I don't think money would ever change things. The old European feudal elite has always snobbishly looked down on the new capitalist elite, seeing even the wealthiest of the haute bourgeoisie as nothing more than vulgar and ostentatious nouveau riche, entirely lacking in proper breeding and virtue.

Well, that is how they might see themselves or not - and still has a Thyssen (steel) girl married into the Habsburg family, one of Europes finest. And she married not some Prince, but the Chef of the House - just as an example. A lot of english families have their american grandmother from New York and so on. But this is a bit off topic in this thread, since they were all decently married!

But back then came money into the castles and manors via marriage and why not without marriage today? Illegitimate...

[theroyalfly]

Originally Posted by victor1319

Well, that is how they might see themselves or not - and still has a Thyssen (steel) girl married into the Habsburg family, one of Europes finest. And she married not some Prince, but the Chef of the House - just as an example. A lot of english families have their american grandmother from New York and so on. But this is a bit off topic in this thread, since they were all decently married!

But back then came money into the castles and manors via marriage and why not without marriage today? Illegitimate...

This is actually a nice topic for another thread.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by victor1319

Yep, you are right and as you said "unless the House of Wettin says" so, the illegitimate Xenia from the example is no real Princess.

But I am willing to bet and the history proves it, if enough monies come into play, she will be recognized, adopted, made a decent member of the house, whatever.

And why not? She is the daughter of a real Princess after all.

She is still born out of wedlock and most Royal houses in Europe have always had the rule that illegitimate children while they may be recogised by their parents and treated as family, are not royal by status, don't inherit the royal rank or titles.

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by victor1319

Well, that is how they might see themselves or not - and still has a Thyssen (steel) girl married into the Habsburg family, one of Europes finest. And she married not some Prince, but the Chef of the House - just as an example. A lot of english families have their american grandmother from New York and so on. But this is a bit off topic in this thread, since they were all decently married!

But back then came money into the castles and manors via marriage and why not without marriage today? Illegitimate...

The Thyssen girl was actually a baroness already, wasn’t she ? Besides, you are comparing apples and oranges. Royals from reigning families in Europe now frequently marry commoners with a middle-class background. There are only rare examples nowadays of royals who marry members of the nobility ( e.g. Philippe and Mathilde, Guillaume and Stéphanie) or marry other royals (e.g. Alois and Sophie).

What is being discussed in this thread , however, is not a commoner becoming royal by a legitimate marriage, which again is quite common these days ( Letizia, Maxima, Mary, Kate, Camilla, Mette-Marit, Daniel, Sofia, Claire, Marie, Laurentine, etc) . Instead, what is being discussed is an illegitimate daughter becoming part of the royal house, which is not possible in most monarchies and, in fact, is barred by law in many existing monarchies where illegitimate children are excluded from the line of succession to the throne.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Mbruno

The Thyssen girl was actually a baroness already, wasn’t she ? Besides, you are comparing apples and oranges. Royals from reigning families in Europe now frequently marry commoners with a middle-class background. There are only rare examples nowadays of royals who marry members of the nobility ( e.g. Philippe and Mathilde, Guillaume and Stéphanie) or marry other royals (e.g. Alois and Sophie).

What is being discussed in this thread , however, is not a commoner becoming royal by a legitimate marriage, which again is quite common these days ( Letizia, Maxima, Mary, Kate, Camilla, Mette-Marit, Daniel, Sofia, Claire, Marie, Laurentine, etc) . Instead, what is being discussed is an illegitimate daughter becoming part of the royal house, which is not possible in most monarchies and, in fact, is barred by law in many existing monarchies where illegitimate children are excluded from the line of succession to the throne.

True and it does not sound like other members of the RF think of this woman as being in any sense a member of the family or Royal