Luxembourg Succession & Titles

[Somebody]

Why? All over the world, husbands don't share their wives' titles, so why is it specifically unfair to Alexandra?

Even within her own family: Her cousin Marie Christine's husband is still a count (not an archduke) and her cousin Marie-Gabrielle's husband is mr Willms (not HRH prince Antonius of Nassau).

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

But in Belgium (offspring of Astrid), the Netherlands (offspring of Margriet) and Sweden (offspring of Madeleine), in hindsight, they regret the ease with which the princely titles have been distributed, with a flood of Von Österreich-Estes, Van Vollenhovens and O'Neills being a member of the Royal House and having a princely title. Not for nothing in all three named countries the titulature has been limited, basically to children of the King and children of the Heir, regardless the gender. Luxembourg will undoubtedly go the same way. If Alexandra marries a prince de Lobkowicz, her children will be princes and princess de Lobkowicz anyway. She has it in her own hand if she is attached to titles for her offspring.

Probably at some point but so far Henri created more princes and princesses of Nassau instead of fewer (Jean's children and Louis' former wife and children). Moreover, the new house law already provides a limitation/a rather easy solution: by not approving a marriage wife and children will become counts/countesses of Nassau instead of princes/princesses of Nassau.

I believe Gabriel and Noah's titles are personal titles that cannot be passed on (as they would need a recognized marriage for that to happen, which is impossible; so their wives and children will be countess and counts/countesses if I am not mistaken).
Amalia cannot pass on her title (the only exception would be if she had been the heir apparent but with the upcoming birth of her cousin that's not likely to happen). So, Liam is currently the only one who can pass on his title in his generation. If they would want to limit the titles, his grandfather or uncle could decide not to approve his marriage. It will probably depend on whether Guillaume and Stephanie will have more than one child and whether his sister will have offspring (so depending on how secure the succession is).
In addition, Sebastien might have sons but as he isn't married yet, we'll have to wait and see.

Prince Guillaume's three sons could also pass on their 'prince of Nassau' titles, however, I wouldn't be surprised if Henri would 'suggest' they don't ask for permission. Unless, we should interpret the house law not to apply to them as they are male line descendants of the former head of the house, not of the current one.

[Tatiana Maria]

Well said. Grand Duke Henri was responsible for manufacturing the "flood" of princes and princesses of Nassau (in addition, he created Prince Robert's children at the same time as Prince Jean's), so it is unlikely he would be sympathetic to limiting this title to children of the Grand Duke and the Heir.

I am not even sure that the sons of Prince Louis, Prince Jean, and Prince Robert cannot pass their titles on. In the grand-ducal decree of 2004 the title Princess/Prince of Nassau was accorded to "the descendants", and not merely "the children", of Princes Robert and Jean:

L'épouse de Son Altesse Royale le Prince Robert, née Julie ONGARO est autorisée à porter le titre d'Altesse Royale, Princesse de Nassau.

Les descendants issus de cette union de même que les descendants issus de l'union de Son Altesse Royale le Prince Jean avec Madame Hélène VESTUR sont qualifiés de la même manière.

Originally Posted by Somebody

Why? All over the world, husbands don't share their wives' titles, so why is it specifically unfair to Alexandra?

The original poster did not say that it was "specifically" unfair to Alexandra. As it was, Princess Alexandra was the topic of the specific question, even if women's inequality exists in naming practices all over the world.

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

But in Belgium (offspring of Astrid), the Netherlands (offspring of Margriet) and Sweden (offspring of Madeleine), in hindsight, they regret the ease with which the princely titles have been distributed, with a flood of Von Österreich-Estes, Van Vollenhovens and O'Neills being a member of the Royal House and having a princely title. Not for nothing in all three named countries the titulature has been limited, basically to children of the King and children of the Heir, regardless the gender.

What leads you to conclude that Belgium and Sweden "regret the ease with which the princely titles have been distributed, with a flood of Von Österreich-Estes [...] and O'Neills" (and the children of Prince Laurent and Prince Carl Philip bear the same princely titles as their cousins, so do they also regret the "flood of Coombs and Hellqvists"?) and have limited them "to children of the King and children of the Heir"? Nothing has been stated in Sweden about the future children of Prince Oscar. In Belgium it is evident from the Belgian king's decree in 2015 that, if nothing else, Princes Gabriel, Emmanuel, Nicolas, and Aymeric can pass princely titles to their children, and one can assume Prince Joachim will pass a princely title (and an archducal title) to his children in the same manner as his brother.

[Blog Real]

In Belgium prince Lorenz (husband of Princess Astrid) was granted the title of Prince of Belgium.
In Sweden the King wanted to give the title of Prince to Chris (husband of Princess Madeleine) but he refused.
So it's not impossible that Princess Alexandra's future husband could have the title of prince.

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by Blog Real

In Belgium prince Lorenz (husband of Princess Astrid) was granted the title of Prince of Belgium.
In Sweden the King wanted to give the title of Prince to Chris (husband of Princess Madeleine) but he refused.
So it's not impossible that Princess Alexandra's future husband could have the title of prince.

Nothing is impossible but I am sure that Henri considered that option when he revised the house laws not that many years ago. At that time he decided that children will bear their father's surname and that husbands of princesses of Luxembourg and/or Nassau will NOT become a prince; the only exception being the husbands of either the grand duchess of the hereditary grand duchess.

[CyrilVladisla]

If a hereditary grand duchess marries a foreign prince, does he receive the title of Hereditary Grand Duke?

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by Blog Real

Yes, and I understand that. But at least the Grand Duke should offer a title to Princess Alexandra's future husband, since the wives of Princess Alexandra's brothers also have titles, it would be fairer even if Alexandra's children had no titles.

But no any female spouse has been offered a title either: Joan Douglas-Dillon, María Teresa Mestre, Hélène Vestur, Diane de Guerre, Sibilla Weiller, Stéphanie de Lannoy, Claire Lademacher, Tessy Antony, etc. In principle all these ladies are addressed by their husband's style and title, purely by courtesy, like is done all over Europe.

This old-fashioned (but most clear) form is still used in Belgian nobility: de barones/la baronne Renaud de Villenfagne de Sorinnes, de gravin/la comtesse Thierry Meeûs d'Argenteuil, de burggravin/la vicomtesse Paul de Jonghe d'Ardoye.

La pincesse Félix de Luxembourg is a more accurate form to designate the position of Claire. Or de prinses Constantijn der Nederlanden for Laurentien. This is no longer used and "princess Claire" or "princess Laurentien" looks like they have received an own royal title, but they have received nothing at all. In essence there is no difference with a Pieter van Vollenhoven, a Salvador Moncada or a Christopher O'Neill who received no title either. The only difference is just the custom to address a female spouse with her husband's title.

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

But no any female spouse has been offered a title either: Joan Douglas-Dillon, María Teresa Mestre, Hélène Vestur, Diane de Guerre, Sibilla Weiller, Stéphanie de Lannoy, Claire Lademacher, Tessy Antony, etc. In principle all these ladies are addressed by their husband's style and title, purely by courtesy, like is done all over Europe.

The house laws accord the titles legally to both the princes and their female spouses, wording it in much the same way as the Belgian royal decrees: "In the public and private acts which concern them". Indeed, the wives are addressed by their titles in legal acts, including the divorce judgment of Princess Tessy.

The Grand Duke has usually shown himself to not be in favor of addressing female spouses of royal princes by courtesy titles. The wife of Prince Jean, who did not receive a princess title under the house law, is addressed by the grand-ducal court as Countess Diane of Nassau, rather than Princess Diane (or Princess Jean) of Luxembourg.

In any event, a courtesy title is a title, and I am not expecting one to be given to the husband of Princess Alexandra.

While "ladies are addressed by their husband's style and title, purely by courtesy" is true for many European countries, it is not the case "all over Europe". In the United Kingdom, for instance, a wife legally takes on her husband's title upon marriage, although she may choose not to be addressed by it (royalty watchers have often discussed this in relation to the Duchess of Cornwall).

Originally Posted by CyrilVladisla

If a hereditary grand duchess marries a foreign prince, does he receive the title of Hereditary Grand Duke?

No, the husband of a hereditary grand duchess will receive only the title of Prince of Luxembourg through the current house laws (for a translation, refer to the link in message #117). He will not even receive the title of Prince of Nassau or the last name of Nassau.

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by Kotroman

She never had any to lose.

She did indeed. And I wonder if the transitional provision in the restated version of 2012 of the 1907 house law, in reference to membership of the advisory council, suggests that the Grand Duke's sisters probably did not lose their succession rights on marriage.

Décret grand-ducal du 18 juin 2012 portant coordination du Statut de famille du 5 mai 1907. - Legilux

Der Beirat besteht aus

a) den drei ältesten ehelichen Nachkommen ersten Grades des Hauschefs und
b) den zwei ältesten ehelichen Nachkommen ersten Grades des vorhergehenden Hauschefs, der amtierende Hauschef ausgenommen,

unter der Voraussetzung, dass sie berechtigte Mitglieder des Großherzoglichen Hauses sind.

[...]

Unter Bezugnahme auf die im Jahre 2008 von der Regierung angekündigte Zurücknahme des im Gesetz vom 15. Dezember 1988 verankerten Vorbehaltes in Bezug auf das Übereinkommen zur Beseitigung jeder Form von Diskriminierung der Frau vom 18. Dezember 1979 wird das Recht zu hausverfassungsmäßigen Betätigungen der Agnaten erweitert auf die berechtigten weiblichen Mitglieder des Großherzoglichen Hauses und findet erstmals Anwendung auf Unsere Deszendenz, sowie, im Falle der Anwendung des gegenwärtigen § 9, Absatz 1, Buchstabe b, auf die weiblichen Mitglieder der Großherzoglichen Familie.

Family Bylaws Concerning the House Law of the House of Luxembourg-Nassau

The advisory council consists of

a) the three oldest marital first grade descendants of the head of the house
b) the two oldest first grade descendants born within wedlock of the previous head of the house with the exception of the current head of the house, on the condition that they are entitled members of the house.

[...]

In reference to the 2008 government revocation announcement of the law of December 15th, 1988, anchoring restriction concerning the convention of the elimination of all forms of discrimination of women of December 18th, 1979, the house-constitutional activities of the agnates are extended to the entitled female members of the Grand Ducal House and is applied for the first time to Our descent, and also, in case of the application of current § 9 (1b), to the female members of the Grand Ducal Family.

Originally Posted by Somebody

That's exactly what I referred to regarding the Nassau pact not being clear. Which is why the 1907 law was needed to provide further interpretation.

We can disagree, but I would not refer to it as "unclear" or "further interpretation" because the original pact did not address the issue, therefore there was no interpretation to be made. It merely indicated that when the throne passed or was expected to pass to a female, then a new succession law ought to be promulgated, which happened in 1907.

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by Somebody

I guess it is a matter of perspective. I believe the Nassau pact stipulated the Salic Law. However, in the event of a discontinuation of the monarchy due to that law, the closest heir of the last male would succeed. In the communication regarding the change it was worded as 'exclusion':

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria

It stipulated that upon the extinction of the male heirs in the house of Nassau, the oldest daughter of the last male, assuming he had daughters (otherwise, the closest female in the Nassau family) would succeed him.

https://www.heraldica.org/topics/royalty/nassau.htm#42

Article 42 also stated that new succession laws should then be created to decide who should succeed the female heir, as the Nassau family pact did not address this. Under the original laws of the family pact, female-line descendants could not be heirs; if the last male's oldest daughter predeceased him, his next oldest daughter (rather than his oldest daughter's children) would inherit. This was dealt with by the 1907 law. [...]

Mémorial A n° 37 de 1907 - Legilux

Happily, the updated website included a better explanation of the old order of succession. Although it continues to use the term Salic rather than semi-Salic, it at least is more explicit tthat princesses have always had rights of succession and that the 1907 law was passed not for the benefit of Marie-Adélaïde, who already was the heiress, but for the benefit of her younger sisters.


https://monarchie.lu/fr/le-chef-de-l...stitutionnelle

Ordre de succession

[...]

Le premier chapitre du pacte de famille de 1783 décrit les possessions souveraines de la Maison de Nassau, et le deuxième chapitre est consacré à l’ordre de succession. [...] À défaut de descendance mâle en ligne directe et en ligne collatérale dans les deux branches, la couronne était transmise par ordre de primogéniture à la descendance féminine de la dynastie régnante.

[...]

En 1906, le Grand-Duc Guillaume IV pressent que son état de santé s’aggrave et que la question de la succession se pose, puisque six filles sont nées de son mariage avec Marie-Anne de Bragance. Il édite donc un nouveau statut de famille pour garantir à ses filles la succession sur le trône. Celui-ci reprend en fait l’article 42 du pacte de famille, qui stipule qu’après l’extinction de tous les membres masculins de la Maison de Nassau, la succession en ligne féminine s’applique. Le statut de 1907 prévoit en outre que les princesses puînées seront appelées à la succession à défaut de descendant mâle de Grande-Duchesse Marie-Adélaïde.