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.

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria

As SirGyamfi1 mentioned, the family of the bride is French and uses the family name de Bourbon-Parme. De Borbón-Parma would be the Spanish variant of the name.

Yes. The title is French, and France has long recognized legitimation by the subsequent marriage of the parents.

The grand-ducal court of Luxembourg (Victoria is a member of the grand-ducal family of Luxembourg on her mother's side) styled Victoria as "S.A.R. la Princesse Victoria de Bourbon Parme" when she attended the centenary of Grand Duke Jean.

Thanks! I noticed that they also recognize Felix (son of Constantin and Kathryn) as 'HRH prince Felix of Nassau' - which is a bit strange given that Gabriel and Noah at first were only 'counts' and were elevated to royal highnesses and princes of Nassaus only several years later - while apparently Louis' cousin (also without rights to the throne) was able to pass on his title (HRH prince of Nassau) to his son that was born out of wedlock immediately after getting married.

So, does Luxembourg nowadays award a title to any child born before marriage upon the subsequent marriage of their parents? Or is this a new rule for the Nassau title? And will it apply to all family members or only to those further from the throne?

[Duc_et_Pair]

The correct name of the Luxembourgian noble family is De Bourbon de Parme. The incorporation of Prince Félix into the Nobility of the Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg was the base for the incorporation of the children of the late Duke of Parma into the Nobility of the Netherlands.

Incorporation is only possible when the Dutch national has a title which is enlisted "in a comparable system of Nobility".

Arrêté grand-ducal du 5 novembre 1919 admettant dans la Noblesse du Grand-Duché le Prince Félix de Bourbon de Parme

Nous CHARLOTTE, par la grâce de Dieu, Grande-Duchesse de Luxembourg, Duchesse de Nassau, etc., etc., etc.;

Voulant donner une marque publique de Notre affection et de Notre bienveillance à Notre cher Cousin Félix Marie Vincent Prince de Bourbon de Parme, né à Schwarzau, le 28 septembre 1895, trosième fils de Notre cher Oncle, Son Altesse Royale Henri Marie Albert Ferdinand Charles Pie Louis Antonin de Bourbon, duc de Parme, Plaisance etc., et de Notre chère Tante, Son Altesse Royale la duchesse douairière Marie-Antonia de Parme, née princesse de Bragance, Infante de Portugal;

Vu l'art. 40 de la Constitution;

Sur le rapport de Notre Ministre d'État, Président du Gouvernement, et après délibération du Gouvernement en Conseil;

Avons trouvé bon et entendu:

D'admettre dans la noblesse de Notre Grand-Duché de Luxembourg le dit Notre cher Cousin Félix Marie Vincent, Prince de Bourbon de Parme et de lui conférer en outre le titre de Prince de Luxembourg, conformément aux Lettres patentes qui Lui seront délivrées.

Notre Ministre d'État, Président du Gouvernement est chargé de l'exécution du présent arrêté.


Château de Berg
le 5 novembre 1919

C h a r l o t t e .

Le Ministre d'État,
Président du Gouvernement

E. Reuter.

[Stefan]

Originally Posted by Somebody

Thanks! I noticed that they also recognize Felix (son of Constantin and Kathryn) as 'HRH prince Felix of Nassau' - which is a bit strange given that Gabriel and Noah at first were only 'counts' and were elevated to royal highnesses and princes of Nassaus only several years later - while apparently Louis' cousin (also without rights to the throne) was able to pass on his title (HRH prince of Nassau) to his son that was born out of wedlock immediately after getting married.

Actually Gabriel and Noah as well as their mother Tessy where not even Count but only De Nassau until their Grandfather elevated them to Princes of Nassau.

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by Stefan

Actually Gabriel and Noah as well as their mother Tessy where not even Count but only De Nassau until their Grandfather elevated them to Princes of Nassau.

Thanks, you are of course right. Jean's children were count and countess of Nassau in between but not Gabriel and Noah.

[Stefan]

Originally Posted by Somebody

Thanks, you are of course right. Jean's children were count and countess of Nassau in between but not Gabriel and Noah.

And at first Jean's children where only Nassau.
I think it would be better to have those without succession rights as Count/Countess of Nassau to make a difference between them and those of approved marriages who also have succession rights like the children of Prince Guillaume and Prince Félix. And i think at first when the title Count/Countess of Nassau was introduced this was also the intention.

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by Stefan

And at first Jean's children where only Nassau.
I think it would be better to have those without succession rights as Count/Countess of Nassau to make a difference between them and those of approved marriages who also have succession rights like the children of Prince Guillaume and Prince Félix. And i think at first when the title Count/Countess of Nassau was introduced this was also the intention.

Yes, and it was confirmed in the Family Bylaws of 2012, see Article 4b:

2) the second and further grade male line marital descendants of the head of the house; with the exception of the offspring of the member of the house called upon to succeed to the throne according to the laws of primogeniture (item 1); and their wives by marriage according to the house rules, have the style of Royal Highness, their first name and the family name “zu Nassau” (“de Nassau”) and the title Prince or Princess of Nassau, etc. etc.

3) those who conducted a marriage without the consent of the head of the house, the family name “zu Nassau” (“de Nassau”) as well as their previous title. The wives and legitimate offspring of this marriage bear their first name and the family name “zu Nassau” (“de Nassau”) as well as the title Count or Countess of Nassau.

So, according to 2) Amalia and Liam are royal highnesses and prince(ss) of Nassau. However, both Louis' and Jean's children should have been Count(ess) of Nassau (with probably the exception of those born out of wedlock) - a title that can be conferred to legitimate offspring of the marriage (elsewhere the term 'marital descendants' and 'born within a marriage' are used).

However, the Head of the House also has the possibility to award different titles to individuals, so I guess we would need to look at the exact wording of the act by which both Jean's and Louis' children got their titles... Unfortunately, there are no publicly available decrees for Tessy, Gabriel and Noah but only a press release(!) - there seem to be decrees for Jean's children, so if anyone has a link, please share.

I agree that it would have been much wiser to just stick with the rules instead of creating an exception for almost any male-line descendent who wasn't a prince(ss) by birth. Which in the case of Gabriel, Tessy and Noah was done both by not making them count(ess) in the first place (see for example this explanation by Luxarazzi - referring to the Arrete Grand-ducal from 1995) and by elevating them to prince and princess later on.

[Duc_et_Pair]

I would follow a system in which only children of the present, the future and a former Grand-Duke are HRH Prince(ss) of Luxembourg, Prince(ss) of Nassau.

All legal offspring to any junior Prince(ss) of Luxembourg then is Count(ess) of Nassau as a hereditary noble title following the rules of the Letters Patent. It would make it more selective and exclusive to be a HRH Prince(ss) of Luxembourg, Prince(ss) of Nassau.

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

I would follow a system in which only children of the present, the future and a former Grand-Duke are HRH Prince(ss) of Luxembourg, Prince(ss) of Nassau.

All legal offspring to any junior Prince(ss) of Luxembourg then is Count(ess) of Nassau as a hereditary noble title following the rules of the Letters Patent. It would make it more selective and exclusive to be a HRH Prince(ss) of Luxembourg, Prince(ss) of Nassau.

They already differentiate between princes of Luxembourg (for those you suggest) vs princes of Nassau (for others). I don't necessarily think that off-spring of reigning royal houses require lower titles than those of defunct monarchies who remain princes and princesses. In addition, they can also claim the title of 'princes de Bourbon de Parme' - and indirectly they are doing that whenever they are using the style of Royal Highness as that is tied to the Bourbon-Parma title (except for the Grand Duke and Hereditary Grand Duke and spouses if I am not mistaken - they already used the style of royal highness before Charlotte's marriage to her cousin Félix).

[An Ard Ri]

When did the Grand Ducal family stop using the Grand Ducal Highness style and became Royal Highness?

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by An Ard Ri

When did the Grand Ducal family stop using the Grand Ducal Highness style and became Royal Highness?

When upon the marriage of grand duchess Charlotte with HRH prince Felix of Bourbon-Parma (de Bourbon de Parme) the grand duchess (and their subsequent off-spring) also became princes and princesses of Bourbon-Parma - which has the style of royal highness.