Royal Women with Illegitimate Children

[victor1319]

Originally Posted by Mbruno

The Thyssen girl was actually a baroness already, wasn’t she ?

Oh c'mon, I was answering to the insinuation, that the royal circles are snobbish and see the rich as vulgar, "entirely lacking in proper breeding and virtue"!

Originally Posted by Mbruno

Royals from reigning families in Europe now frequently marry commoners with a middle-class background.

Thank you, for supporting my argument!

Originally Posted by Mbruno

Instead, what is being discussed is an illegitimate daughter becoming part of the royal house...

We were discussing this Xenia of Saxonia, right? And my point was, with some monies her status could sure be healed.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by victor1319

Oh c'mon, I was answering to the insinuation, that the royal circles are snobbish and see the rich as vulgar, "entirely lacking in proper breeding and virtue"!



Thank you, for supporting my argument!



We were discussing this Xenia of Saxonia, right? And my point was, with some monies her status could sure be healed.

How? Money would not make her a Princess and there is in any case no Monarchy in Germany

[Troy Thompson]

If money allowed someone to become a royal, Bill Gates would be the Supreme Emperor of Earth.



Now, there's only one case in recent history that comes to my mind of a bastard being given a royal title, that being Leandro Alfonso Luis de Borbón Ruiz Austria, the illegitimate half-uncle of former Spanish King Juan Carlos, who was granted the right to use the title of Infante by court order on May 21, 2003. That was only possible because the Spanish judiciary willed it (and it surely didn't hurt that Leandro had a warm relationship with his nephew; it also didn't hurt that Leandro was a royal bastard rather than just the bastard of a royal—the distinction there being that a royal bastard is the illegitimate child of a sovereign (Alfonso XIII, in Leandro's case)).


Either way, unless the German monarchy were restored, that is not likely to ever happen in the case of any illegitimate child born to any member of the House of Wettin or any other German house, for the simple reason that neither the Federal Republic of Germany nor any of its constituent states give any recognition at all to royal and noble titles, aside from their use as surnames. Since the German Bund und Länder do not recognize the titles, German courts cannot determine that anyone has the right to the titles.

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by Troy Thompson

If money allowed someone to become a royal, Bill Gates would be the Supreme Emperor of Earth.



Now, there's only one case in recent history that comes to my mind of a bastard being given a royal title, that being Leandro Alfonso Luis de Borbón Ruiz Austria, the illegitimate half-uncle of former Spanish King Juan Carlos, who was granted the right to use the title of Infante by court order on May 21, 2003. That was only possible because the Spanish judiciary willed it (and it surely didn't hurt that Leandro had a warm relationship with his nephew; it also didn't hurt that Leandro was a royal bastard rather than just the bastard of a royal—the distinction there being that a royal bastard is the illegitimate child of a sovereign (Alfonso XIII, in Leandro's case)).
s.

Actually, under current Spanish law (royal decree 1368/1987), the King of Spain can exceptionally extend the dignity of Infante to any person he deems worthy, with the caveat that those so-called "infantes de gracia" bear the style of Highness only, as opposed to Royal Highness.

[Troy Thompson]

Originally Posted by Mbruno

Actually, under current Spanish law (royal decree 1368/1987), the King of Spain can exceptionally extend the dignity of Infante to any person he deems worthy, with the caveat that those so-called "infantes de gracia" bear the style of Highness only, as opposed to Royal Highness.

At the risk of creating another tangent: Is the Spanish title infante de gracia then roughly equivalent to the French title légitimé? Well, of course not generally, seeing as it can be granted to anyone, but when granted to a (legitimized) bastard, would they then be somewhat equivalent?

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by 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.

Originally Posted by Troy Thompson

Either way, unless the German monarchy were restored, that is not likely to ever happen in the case of any illegitimate child born to any member of the House of Wettin or any other German house, for the simple reason that neither the Federal Republic of Germany nor any of its constituent states give any recognition at all to royal and noble titles, aside from their use as surnames. Since the German Bund und Länder do not recognize the titles, German courts cannot determine that anyone has the right to the titles.

I think that is a good summation of the way it is looked at in the family circles of the former monarchical houses.

The state of Germany looks at it otherwise (as you already know, but others can refer to the court ruling in post #59). The law in force does not distinguish between children of males and females, legitimate and illegitimate children, or members and non-members of the private society called the House of Wettin. With a legitimate child of a male member of the House of Wettin, the words Prinzessin/Prinz von Sachsen are also recognized as surnames, not titles.

Furthermore, if the argument used by the private societies is that the surname Princess of Saxony is not an "actual title" because it is not recognized as such by the state, then neither is there any rationale for treating the titles awarded by the family as "actual titles". The family-awarded titles are not recognized by the state in any form, even as surnames.

Originally Posted by Troy Thompson

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.

I agree with you (although the male members of houses have been remarkably flexible when the 19th century norms would prohibit them from marrying the "unequal" wives of their choice!), and that is another reason why I fail to see why children who (by the House's own words) do not belong to the House should be made to keep to the House's rules, particularly when they contradict the laws of the state.

Originally Posted by Mbruno

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.

Actually, I believe what was being discussed was whether an illegitimate daughter and some members of the public are wrong for treating her in keeping with the laws of the state rather than the decisions of a family which has excluded her.

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...

Within the existing German legal system, her status is the same as that of a legitimate child. Whether that status should be seen as "royal" or not is a different question.

Originally Posted by Troy Thompson

Now, there's only one case in recent history that comes to my mind of a bastard being given a royal title, that being Leandro Alfonso Luis de Borbón Ruiz Austria, [...]

I have read differently regarding Leandro de Borbón, but I will reply to that later in the Spanish forum.

[victor1319]

Originally Posted by Denville

How? Money would not make her a Princess and there is in any case no Monarchy in Germany

She is already a princess by name according to german laws, this Xenia of Saxonia. She is just not recognized by the House of Saxonia.

[Troy Thompson]

Originally Posted by victor1319

She is already a princess by name according to german laws, this Xenia of Saxonia. She is just not recognized by the House of Saxonia.

The fact that Germany recognizes her surname to be Prinzessin von Sachsen does not mean she is a princess any more than Dwight Eisenhower was an iron hewer, Margaret Thatcher made thatched roofs, or Bob Dylan (whose surname by birth was Zimmerman) builds houses. Having the title of princess makes one a princess, and Xenia, regardless of her surname, has not the title of princess.

[Nice Nofret]

Also the Mother of that Xenia is no Princess at all (as in titel) but only Princess by NAME


because Germany doesn't have a Monarchy anymore; Germany doesn't recognise any German Titels anymore


For the House of Wettin, the mother is a member of the private society of House of Wettin; not so the daughters because out of wedlock


Out of courtesy some Germans still adress Members of once existing Houses by once existing Titels, courtesy titels and form of address.


that does NOT give it any legal function what so ever.


I'm myself closely related to Germanys once existing nobility with Princes from Reigning Houses etc.

[Troy Thompson]

For a couple of really old examples of royal women who had illegitimate children, Charlemagne's daughters, Rotrude and Bertha, produced one and two illegitimate sons, respectively.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by guantanamera

In more modern times, for example, it is rumored that King Juan Carlos I of Spain has several illegitimate children

but he is not a woman....

[Biri]

The nickname of this Princess was taken from the insinuation that her biological father was in fact Beltran de la Cueva and not King Henry IV of Castille:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joanna_la_Beltraneja

Her mother Joan of Portugal had also to sons by Pedro de Castilla y Fonseca "el mozo", nephew of Bishop Fonseca (born after she was divorced by Henry IV and banished from the court):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joan_of_Portugal

[eya]

All the Royals (Men and Women) With (Rumored) Illegitimate Children


https://www.marieclaire.com/culture/...mate-children/

[melina premiere]

Some stories on this report are true, some other are just estrapolations

[ImKevin]

Originally Posted by melina premiere

Some stories on this report are true, some other are just estrapolations

Would you be willing to provide some examples?

[Biri]

Stillborn son of Natalia Alexieyevna (Wilhelmina of Hesse-Darmstadt) could be a child of her lover Andrei Razumovsky and not future Paul I Romanov.

[Moonmaiden23]

Originally Posted by ImKevin

Would you be willing to provide some examples?

The most obvious ones are Princess Margaret and the body double and Charles/Camilla with their secret hidden son, conceived when the PoW was a boy of 17.

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by Nice Nofret

Also the Mother of that Xenia is no Princess at all (as in titel) but only Princess by NAME

because Germany doesn't have a Monarchy anymore; Germany doesn't recognise any German Titels anymore

For the House of Wettin, the mother is a member of the private society of House of Wettin; not so the daughters because out of wedlock

Out of courtesy some Germans still adress Members of once existing Houses by once existing Titels, courtesy titels and form of address.

that does NOT give it any legal function what so ever.

Thank you for putting it succinctly.

Private societies in the Federal Republic of Germany undoubtedly have the right to determine their own qualifications for membership and the unofficial titles used internally between members of those private societies.

What private societies in the Federal Republic of Germany do not have the right to do is to issue determinations about who is or is not a Prince(ss) which are binding on non-members.

In the Federal Republic of Germany, a female-line descendant born outside of marriage and a male-line descendant born in a marriage are equally private citizens and equally legitimate carriers of the surname Prinz(essin) von Sachsen (Prince(ss) of Saxony) with equal rights to be addressed with their surnames as courtesy titles in whichever private societies or circles will accept them.

When other carriers of the surname Prinz von Sachsen decide they will not recognize Xenia as a "real princess" because she was born out of wedlock, because she was born through a female line, or under any other criterion they please, that is (legally speaking) their right.

Equally, if Xenia decides she will not recognize those same distant relatives as "real princes", under any criterion she pleases, that is her right.

And neither determination could bind members of the media or the general public, who are entitled to decide for themselves which carriers of the surname Prince(ss) of Saxony they recognize as Princes(ses).


Regarding the argument that no illegitimate or female-line children were entitled to royal status under the traditional house laws of the House of Saxony: Following the same logic, one would expect the argument that Joséphine and Oscar O'Hare are not Princes(ses) of Belgium or members of the Royal House of Belgium, given that the traditional house laws of the Belgian Royal House did not recognize female-line or illegitimate descendants as Princes(ses) of the Royal House of Belgium. But actually nobody has made that argument, at least not in this particular debate. I suppose I will repeat my question from a very similar discussion:

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria

The fact that most people are supportive of the Belgian judiciary awarding royal titles to Delphine as a special favor restricted to her and her children without altering the unequal situation of other out of wedlock descendants of nobility, but - at the same time - adamantly criticize the laws of the republic of Germany which allow all children of titled families to receive the same titles in their names without discrimination on the basis of legitimacy - confounds me, to be honest. From my perspective the latter approach is more equitable than the former. Would anyone explain why most people have the opposing stance?

[Denville]

i dont think that the allowing Delphine to become a princess was a good idea, but stil Belgium IS a monarchy, while Germany is a republic. So the whole thing of still using titles in Germany or getting aeriated about them....whether from legitimate lines or not, seems silly. If you live in a republic, give up the titles.