A Potential Wife for Prince Harry

[Curryong]

To be fair though, one of the most prominent snobs of the 'Kate isn't fit to be a royal' camp was James Whittaker, a well-known ex gossip columnist of, I think, the Daily Express, and he wasn't in William's circle.

Whoever Harry marries might have an easier time of it than Kate, both because the level of expectation isn't so heavy and because Harry does have quite a varied amount of friends that we don't hear anything about much. For instance, I wouldn't have known that Harry had visited his co-pilot from Afghanistan and his fiancée, now wife many times, if Simon hadn't let it slip in an interview.

With the possible exception of Cressida, who didn't appear too self-confident, Harry appears to like free-spirited, independent women who allow a bit of freedom in the relationship. I certainly hope that he meets someone who can make him happy before too long. I wouldn't want him to still be single in his late thirties. For one thing, Harry would make a marvellous father.

 

[Ish]

Quite frankly, I think much of that struggle into integrating herself with William's group of friends is that they are snotty brats. Or at least the ones who used to make fun of the Middletons for working in aviation, he being a pilot and she being a flight attendant. Apparently in front of Kate. As if anybody should be shamed for working. The shame belongs to that group of snobs who now have to bow/curtsy to the woman whose parents they mocked for having jobs.

I agree. The problem is that William and Harry do have a good overlap in friends, so any new blood bride of Harry's will potentially have to go up against at least some of this resistance as well.

To be fair though, one of the most prominent snobs of the 'Kate isn't fit to be a royal' camp was James Whittaker, a well-known ex gossip columnist of, I think, the Daily Express, and he wasn't in William's circle.

Whoever Harry marries might have an easier time of it than Kate, both because the level of expectation isn't so heavy and because Harry does have quite a varied amount of friends that we don't hear anything about much. For instance, I wouldn't have known that Harry had visited his co-pilot from Afghanistan and his fiancée, now wife many times, if Simon hadn't let it slip in an interview.

With the possible exception of Cressida, who didn't appear too self-confident, Harry appears to like free-spirited, independent women who allow a bit of freedom in the relationship. I certainly hope that he meets someone who can make him happy before too long. I wouldn't want him to still be single in his late thirties. For one thing, Harry would make a marvellous father.

I wouldn't say that Cressida wasn't a free spirited, independent woman who gave Harry a lot of freedom. From what I've seen of her free spirited is definitely up her alley, and she was his girlfriend when the Vegas incident happened.

I think a problem Harry is likely to continuously have in his relationships is that he likes the free spirited, independent women. Those are ones who will struggle with the constraints of royal life.

One of the things that I think Kate is spectacular at is knowing when to be more deferential to her husband and in-laws and when to shine herself. I think she does a really good job knowing how to walk that line - while she might get more press attention at shared events, I don't think that's because of her so much as because of the media. This is something that Diana was never good at - she liked to shine - and I think it didn't help the problems in her marriage. Harry's wife will be in a different position from Kate and Diana, but if she shines too brightly and doesn't know when to be deferential she'll struggle more.

 

[Zinnia]

To be fair though, one of the most prominent snobs of the 'Kate isn't fit to be a royal' camp was James Whittaker, a well-known ex gossip columnist of, I think, the Daily Express, and he wasn't in William's group

I'm not sure how this relates to my comment about William having snotty friends who mocked the Middletons for having the audacity to work for a living. What am I missing?

 

[Mirabel]

One of the things that I think Kate is spectacular at is knowing when to be more deferential to her husband and in-laws and when to shine herself. I think she does a really good job knowing how to walk that line - while she might get more press attention at shared events, I don't think that's because of her so much as because of the media. This is something that Diana was never good at - she liked to shine - and I think it didn't help the problems in her marriage. Harry's wife will be in a different position from Kate and Diana, but if she shines too brightly and doesn't know when to be deferential she'll struggle more.

I agree completely! Kate defers to William, in a way that Diana never deferred to Charles.

If Harry's future wife intends to fit into the RF, she'll do the same; there can't be rival monarchies!

 

[AristoCat]

Just a thought, but maybe fans of Harry could participate in a REAL dating show. Something.

Or maybe he should marry Pippa.

 

[Curryong]

Another 'I Wanna Marry Harry' show? Please no! I think Pippa is happy with Nico. Harry may well be feeling a bit down today as there are reports Chelsy is about to announce her engagement.

Zinnia, James Whittaker made snarky remarks in interviews and in the Press about the Middletons' middleclass background. At least William's friends kept their remarks in their own circle.

 

[Skippyboo]

We don't actually know if William's friends made snarky comments like Door to Manual etc. Remember all the criticism of Carole at William's Sandhurst passing out where she made so called mistakes while meeting the Queen. While several years later, we find out that Carole didn't meet the Queen until weeks before the wedding. As William said during his engagement interview, don't always believe what you read in the paper.

That being said, Harry is going to meet people thru his friends, thru the military and the charities that he does engagements for. So if you are sitting at home on benefits, you probably aren't going to meet Harry but someone that works for a charity that doesn't have an aristocratic background could meet Harry. Kinda how Sophie met Edward .


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[cari373]

I am not sure if all of these are Non-Roman Catholic ladies, but they are all in his age range and might be good picks




Princess Irina Maria Nina Kira of Prussia (b. 4 Jul 1988)


Countess Marie-Thérèse Walburga Gabrielle Diana Georgina Franziska (b. Memmingen, 5 October 1989).


Countess Maria Elisabeth Walburga Apollonia Alexandra Friederike (b. Ravensburg, 31 December 1990).


Countess Marie Charlotte Walburga Antonia Adelheid Viktoria Henriette (b. Ravensburg, 10 May 1992).


Countess Marie Hélène Walburga Yolande Christiana Michaela (b. Ravensburg, 29 November 1993)


Princess Léopoldine Eléonore Thérèse Marie of Liechtenstein (b. 27 June 1990, Vienna)


Princess Marie Immaculata Elisabeth Rose Adelgunde of Liechtenstein (b. 15 Dec 1991, Vienna)


Lady Violet Diana Louise Manners (b. 18 August 1993)


Lady Pollyanna Louisa Clementine FitzGerald (born John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, Oxfordshire, 9 May 1982),


Lady Viola Georgina Grosvenor (b. 12 October 1992)


Lady Sophia Rose Seymour (b. 1987)


Lady Henrietta Charlotte Seymour (b. 1989)


Lady Isabella Elsa Somerset (b. 1991 - also known as Bella Somerset)

 

[HereditaryPrincess]

Whilst they are all interesting suggestions, times have changed and it's no longer compulsory for royals to marry other royals or aristocrats. I'm also doubting most of these suggestions, because I believe that Harry will marry someone who moves in his social circles, but of course I don't know for sure, and some of these young women could indeed move in the same social circles as Harry.

Also, Harry doesn't have to marry just a Protestant or a member of the Church of England, as the succession law was amended last year, to include Roman Catholics in the line of succession. I also read that Harry could now marry a girl of any religion.

 

[cari373]

That's great news that religion doesn't matter. I was reading the earlier posts in the thread, and that is why I thought that. I am still learning about the royals and appreciate any knowledge you can give me. I was under the impression that kings and princes were to marry royalty, but William was allowed to marry Kate, and she isn't. Why is that? What changed?

 

[Skippyboo]

That's great news that religion doesn't matter. I was reading the earlier posts in the thread, and that is why I thought that. I am still learning about the royals and appreciate any knowledge you can give me. I was under the impression that kings and princes were to marry royalty, but William was allowed to marry Kate, and she isn't. Why is that? What changed?

They don't have marry royalty. They used to in older days to form alliances between countries. But this hasn't happen in a long time. Most of the people that marry into royalty are regular people.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Zonk]

Please note all that posts regarding Chelsy Davy and Cressida Bonas should be posted in the following thread http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f161/royals-ex-partners-7453.html .

 

[cari373]

Oh ok. Thank you. So since all the countries no longer have ONLY rulers, marrying royalty doesn't matter? Since Charles' s father was the Prince of Greece, why didn't the UK and Greece become one country upon his marriage to Elizabeth? If Harry were to marry someone of royalty, are there people who would prefer him to be on the throne in the future?

 

[Nice Nofret]

a) Prince Phillip was a Prince of Greece and Denmark ...
b) Greece was a Republic by then
c) QEII is Queen of GB, Kanada, Australia and other realms ... it' doesn't work like your idea ...

 

[miss whirley]

The BRF hasn't married fellow royals since Philip and Marina. I'd be shocked if Harry went that old school. Harry has never shown interest in other Royal families. But it would make a certain portion of the Royal Fandom happy, the ones that see commoners as riff raff. A bit of self-hatred involved there.

In all likelihood he will continue to sleep his way through the aristo set, until one of the ladies sets her spell on him. Or he could throw a Hail Mary and start dating a working class girl. We don't know Harry so everything is just guesswork.

 

[cari373]

So, this is just an example, but what if, in the very distant future, Prince William's son decided he wanted to marry the daughter of one of the other royal houses in Europe, would that make any more countries join the UK? I am only asking out of curiosity and the fact that I love to learn about this stuff.

 

[miss whirley]

So, this is just an example, but what if, in the very distant future, Prince William's son decided he wanted to marry the daughter of one of the other royal houses in Europe, would that make any more countries join the UK? I am only asking out of curiosity and the fact that I love to learn about this stuff.

No. The lady in question would join the BRF. But it would have no impact on her home country. Unless the lady was a Crown Princess then she would have to surrender her claim on her own throne, or George would have to surrender his. The two would not merge.

 

[Mbruno]

Oh ok. Thank you. So since all the countries no longer have ONLY rulers, marrying royalty doesn't matter? Since Charles' s father was the Prince of Greece, why didn't the UK and Greece become one country upon his marriage to Elizabeth? If Harry were to marry someone of royalty, are there people who would prefer him to be on the throne in the future?

Prince Philip was not the heir to the Greek throne. He was the nephew of King Constantine I and cousin to the heir apparent and future king, George II.

 

[cari373]

And out of curiosity, why do they not merge?

Very interesting about Harry. Well, I bet he marries someone with a military background of sone sort. He loves his military life.

 

[Skippyboo]

They don't merge because they are independent countries. The royal families of Europe are figureheads and have no political power.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[miss whirley]

And out of curiosity, why do they not merge?

Very interesting about Harry. Well, I bet he marries someone with a military background of sone sort. He loves his military life.

Because these are different countries with different governments. You wouldn't join them just because a couple figureheads wanted to marry. The days of Imperial Dynasties are over.

If William had married one of the Bush twins, the Uk wouldn't have claim on the USA and say" The Declaration of Independence has been repealed, the Windsors will now use The White House as a vacation home."

 

[Alison H]

It's usually reported that it was George V who decided that it was OK for the monarch's children to marry non-royals - although his sister married the Duke of Fife, and his aunt married the Marquess of Lorne. Partly because there was a bit of anti-"foreigner" feeling around after the First World War.

William met Kate at university, but I'm not sure that Harry would have as many opportunities to meet a middle or working-class person, because he does seem to hang around with this upper-class set.

There've been a few cases of countries merging by royal marriage in the past - Aragon and Castile, Austria and Hungary, Poland and Lithuania - and some, including England and Scotland, and Denmark, Norway and Sweden, indirectly merging by marriage because one line died out so the same person inherited both thrones - but that's going back a long way!

 

[Mbruno]

It's usually reported that it was George V who decided that it was OK for the monarch's children to marry non-royals - although his sister married the Duke of Fife, and his aunt married the Marquess of Lorne. Partly because there was a bit of anti-"foreigner" feeling around after the First World War.

William met Kate at university, but I'm not sure that Harry would have as many opportunities to meet a middle or working-class person, because he does seem to hang around with this upper-class set.

There've been a few cases of countries merging by royal marriage in the past - Aragon and Castile, Austria and Hungary, Poland and Lithuania - and some, including England and Scotland, and Denmark, Norway and Sweden, indirectly merging by marriage because one line died out so the same person inherited both thrones - but that's going back a long way!

England and Scotland did not merge when the same person (James I) inherited both thrones. THey remained two separate countries, with separate parliaments and laws, sharing however the same king. The merger only came much later with the Act of Union of 1707.

Technically speaking, the same happened to Aragon and Castile, which remained separate kingdoms in personal union until after the War of Spanish Succession when the new Bourbon king of Spain, Philip V, finally abolished the separate legal personality of the Crown of Aragon.

Likewise, Sweden, Norway and Denmark, or Austria and Hungary were also separate crowns in personal union only.

 

[cari373]

Perfect! Thank you. I was wondering why that was the case. So a monarch wouldn't rule all of Europe, since each country has its own government, these are figureheads from when kings and queens did truly rule as the sole power in a country. They have some power nowadays, but very little, leaving most issues to Parliment. I wish the US had just not had the revolutionary war, then we would be Canada. I like that government much better.

 

[Ish]

That's great news that religion doesn't matter. I was reading the earlier posts in the thread, and that is why I thought that. I am still learning about the royals and appreciate any knowledge you can give me. I was under the impression that kings and princes were to marry royalty, but William was allowed to marry Kate, and she isn't. Why is that? What changed?

Many, although not all, reigning families used to require that the marriages of members of the RF be equal or dynastic; if you entered into a marriage that wasn't equal or dynastic you lost your succession rights. This was common particularly in the Germanic houses, and spread into other houses as Germanic influence took over (male-only inheritance spread in a similar fashion). However, not all realms officially required it, with many just requiring that the monarch consent to a marriage; from a technical standpoint a British royal could have always married a person of any background, it just depended on if the monarch was okay with it.

By the end of the 19th century and the start of the 20th century these rules were beginning to fade in popularity; a big reason being the overall tensions between various realms, as well as the decline of monarchies. British Princesses began marrying British nobles as early as the reign of Queen Victoria. The downfall of many realms in the interwar period really cemented this idea, as did the fact that the Germans were the villains in both World Wars. Isolationism became something of a thing and it was seen as more important to marry someone from your realm - to assert the Britishness of the British monarchy. In the modern day, the only royal families that really push this idea still are those who are no longer reigning.

Oh ok. Thank you. So since all the countries no longer have ONLY rulers, marrying royalty doesn't matter? Since Charles' s father was the Prince of Greece, why didn't the UK and Greece become one country upon his marriage to Elizabeth? If Harry were to marry someone of royalty, are there people who would prefer him to be on the throne in the future?

In the past when a personal union was formed between two realms it was because the monarch was the monarch of two realms - i.e. James VI and I, who inherited first Scotland then later England, or George I who inherited first Hanover then Great Britain. Sometimes this would lead to a formal joining of the two realms - Scotland and England eventually became one realm - other times it didn't - Hanover and Great Britain were always separate.

Greece and the UK were never likely to become one realm however; Prince Philip was a Prince of Greece and Denmark, but he wasn't the heir apparent, or even close. He was born the only son of the youngest son of the first King of Greece, George I (who had died before Prince Philip's birth). The king at the time of the DoE's birth was his uncle, Constantine I, and by the time of his marriage the king was his cousin, Paul of Greece.

So, this is just an example, but what if, in the very distant future, Prince William's son decided he wanted to marry the daughter of one of the other royal houses in Europe, would that make any more countries join the UK? I am only asking out of curiosity and the fact that I love to learn about this stuff.

If Prince George were to marry a foreign royal it would be very unlikely that the circumstances for a personal union between the two realms would be created; even in times when the marrying of royals was a common occurrence, it wasn't common for heirs to marry heirs. Now in many cases it's outright frowned upon, and it's likely that one of them - either George or the spouse - would be expected to give up their succession rights. If that didn't happen, then it's likely that of their children, the elder would inherit one realm and the younger would inherit another.

Even if the circumstances for a child of Prince George's to be monarch of another European realm occurred, that other realm wouldn't join the UK - they'd still be separate. Instead it would more likely join the Commonwealth Realms. After all, the Queen currently is monarch of more than just the UK, but Canada, Australia, etc, aren't considered to be a part of the UK and are quite independent.

 

[Mbruno]

Many, although not all, reigning families used to require that the marriages of members of the RF be equal or dynastic; if you entered into a marriage that wasn't equal or dynastic you lost your succession rights. This was common particularly in the Germanic houses, and spread into other houses as Germanic influence took over (male-only inheritance spread in a similar fashion). However, not all realms officially required it, with many just requiring that the monarch consent to a marriage; from a technical standpoint a British royal could have always married a person of any background, it just depended on if the monarch was okay with it.

By the end of the 19th century and the start of the 20th century these rules were beginning to fade in popularity; a big reason being the overall tensions between various realms, as well as the decline of monarchies. British Princesses began marrying British nobles as early as the reign of Queen Victoria. The downfall of many realms in the interwar period really cemented this idea, as did the fact that the Germans were the villains in both World Wars. Isolationism became something of a thing and it was seen as more important to marry someone from your realm - to assert the Britishness of the British monarchy. In the modern day, the only royal families that really push this idea still are those who are no longer reigning.



In the past when a personal union was formed between two realms it was because the monarch was the monarch of two realms - i.e. James VI and I, who inherited first Scotland then later England, or George I who inherited first Hanover then Great Britain. Sometimes this would lead to a formal joining of the two realms - Scotland and England eventually became one realm - other times it didn't - Hanover and Great Britain were always separate.

Greece and the UK were never likely to become one realm however; Prince Philip was a Prince of Greece and Denmark, but he wasn't the heir apparent, or even close. He was born the only son of the youngest son of the first King of Greece, George I (who had died before Prince Philip's birth). The king at the time of the DoE's birth was his uncle, Constantine I, and by the time of his marriage the king was his cousin, Paul of Greece.



If Prince George were to marry a foreign royal it would be very unlikely that the circumstances for a personal union between the two realms would be created; even in times when the marrying of royals was a common occurrence, it wasn't common for heirs to marry heirs. Now in many cases it's outright frowned upon, and it's likely that one of them - either George or the spouse - would be expected to give up their succession rights. If that didn't happen, then it's likely that of their children, the elder would inherit one realm and the younger would inherit another.

Even if the circumstances for a child of Prince George's to be monarch of another European realm occurred, that other realm wouldn't join the UK - they'd still be separate. Instead it would more likely join the Commonwealth Realms. After all, the Queen currently is monarch of more than just the UK, but Canada, Australia, etc, aren't considered to be a part of the UK and are quite independent.

Marriages between royal heirs are out of question these days, but other dynastic marriages cannot be entirely ruled out. Lord Mountbatten for example is rumoured to have tried to negotiate the marriage between prince Carl Gustaf of Sweden and princess Anne (now the Princess Royal), but, apparently, Carl Gustaf wasn't interested.

 

[Ish]

Marriages between royal heirs are out of question these days, but other dynastic marriages cannot be entirely ruled out. Lord Mountbatten for example is rumoured to have tried to negotiate the marriage between prince Carl Gustaf of Sweden and princess Anne (now the Princess Royal), but, apparently, Carl Gustaf wasn't interested.

I wouldn't rule out the possibility of marriages between royals, although no ruling house requires it anymore. That said, I wouldn't necessarily say that Lord Mountbatten trying to arrange a marriage is a recent example - given as he died more than 30 years ago.

 

[Curryong]

I think that the days of royals marrying each other is the exception rather than the rule nowadays. I agree with other posters that Harry is likely to marry someone in his social circle in the next few years.

It was a case of facing up to the realities of the situation for the British Royal Family after World War One. For hundreds of years the royal families of Europe had taken brides (and sometimes grooms) from the small royal and noble houses of Germany.

Before Bismarck, and to a lesser extent after it, Germany was a patchwork of small, independent kingdoms, Margravedoms, etc. After 1918 these were gone for ever for all practical purposes. Prussia was regarded with repulsion by people in Britain, because of the Kaiser. Any chance of a British Prince marrying into the Kaiser's family without serious repercussions from the public was practically zero.

 

[mslewis]

Marriages between royal heirs are out of question these days, but other dynastic marriages cannot be entirely ruled out. Lord Mountbatten for example is rumoured to have tried to negotiate the marriage between prince Carl Gustaf of Sweden and princess Anne (now the Princess Royal), but, apparently, Carl Gustaf wasn't interested.

I have a feeling Anne had a few things to say about marrying Carl Gustaf. I can't imagine she was too keen on it. I remember when Edward was born someone asked Anne how she felt and she said she was happy it was another boy because it put her farther away from the throne. I can't imagine she had any interest in being Queen of Sweden. Besides, Carl Gustaf was in love with Silvia for a very long time and they were just waiting for the old King to die so they could marry.

Also re: Anne . . . when she announced her engagement to her first husband (Phillips. Can't remember his first name) I remember seeing a news story about it and a snobby older lady was asked her opinion and she said "It's like marrying the stable boy, isn't it"? I laughed out loud because she sounded just like I expected a British aristo to sound. So, back then, it was still a bit unacceptable for the British Royals to marry the "common folk." So glad things have changed. Makes following the BRF much more interesting.

 

[Rudolph]

Its been something like 80 years since a princess married into the BRF and 65 years for a prince. In the case of Philip, courtiers would have much preferred a British duke to a penniless Greek prince.

Harry will marry when the time is right and when he finds someone to take it on. The other thing to remember is just because a girl is a semi-aristo doesn't mean anything in 2014. Having a family member with a title doesn't unlock the door to the BRF.

No matter who Harry ends up marrying there will be an inevitably learning curve