The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Join The Royal Forums Today
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 03-18-2011, 07:03 AM
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Kenilworth, United Kingdom
Posts: 8
Latest Book on Royal Marriages

Good morning everybody. I posted a few weeks back asking for details on certain recent royal weddings, and explained that the research was for an upcoming book. Well, The Rights & Wrongs of Royal Marriage has just been published and is available on Amazon (The Rights and Wrongs of Royal Marriage: How the Law Has Led to Heartbreak, Farce and Confusion, and Why it Must be Changed: Rebecca Probert: Books).

Amongst many other things, Professor Rebecca Probert explains the detailed legal background to royal marriage, shows how the rules have affected individuals and the identity of the monarchy, then examines Lord Falconer's infamous "written statement" in 2005 and concludes that his lack of proper legal understanding has left the law extremely unclear. She ends by setting out suggestions for reform to make the law certain.

The Rights & Wrongs of Royal Marriage is one of those rare books on the royal family written by an academic who isn't out to undermine the monarchy - Professor Probert's very clear that governments over the decades have let the royal family down by refusing to look at royal marriage law, and that it would be utterly unjust for future royals to find their marriages being challenged because the implications of Lord Falconer's claims haven't been thought through. In fact, she was one of the people demanding the government pass legislation in 2005 making it sure that Charles and Camilla could marry in a civil ceremony.

Without turning this post into nothing but an advert (I'm sure people will be genuinely interested by the book's arguments), some of Professor Probert's interesting conclusions are that (i) Charles and Camilla are validly married, but not for the reasons that Lord Falconer claimed. (ii) In 1957, Harold Macmillan consented to a cover-up after officials realised that Prince Philip could be argued to be illegitimate by a strict interpretation of statute. This, of course, makes a mockery of the law. (iii) Margaret could have married Townsend and retained her status, titles and her position in the succession, but officials seem to have misled her by omission over that last point, a fact which previous researchers have all missed.

If anybody has any comments or questions on Professor Probert's research, I'd be delighted (as the publisher) to pass them on and give a reply.

Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2011, 03:32 PM
Heir Presumptive
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: katonah, United States
Posts: 2,582
Thank you for the information. I look forward to reading it.

Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2011, 04:07 PM
PrincessKaimi's Avatar
Serene Highness
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hilo, Malibu, United States
Posts: 1,348
It has seemed to us (the research team at my house) that Princess Margaret was deliberately misled by officials, including church officials. The topic of the book is fascinating.

I would love to see it available for Kindle.
Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2011, 07:00 PM
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Kenilworth, United Kingdom
Posts: 8
I do hope people enjoy it - it's certainly a definitive account of the legal history of royal marriage law, with plenty of fresh research into marriages (and non-marriages) in the 20th and 21st centuries, but very very little of the same-old-same-old stories which always seem to do the rounds of each and every biography - the author has only included these when unavoidable. Princess Kaimi - your domestic research team (they're not kidnapped and held hostage, are they?) is quite right to think she was deliberately misled, and the files in the National Archives over here show a clear paper trail of officials considering the Privy Council option before hiding it from her. As it happens, I'm looking at having a Kindle version ready sometime soon, but how soon exactly depends on the technical difficulty of doing just that - I hope I'll have it out before the big wedding, but don't hold me to that!
Reply With Quote

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Royal Marriages Act of 1772 and Royal Marriages branchg British Royals 99 12-31-2012 10:24 PM

Popular Tags
#royalrelatives #royalgenes abu dhabi american history anastasia 2020 armstrong-jones baptism british royal family british royals cht commonwealth countries countess of snowdon cover-up customs daisy dutch royal family emperor family tree games gustaf vi adolf haakon vii history house of windsor interesting introduction israel jack brooksbank jewelry jumma kent kids movie king willem-alexander książ castle line of succession list of rulers luxembourg maxima nepal nepalese royal family popularity prince charles prince constantijn princess catharina-amalia princess chulabhorn princess dita princess elizabeth pronunciation queen consort queen maud queen maxima royal balls royal events royal family royal jewels royal spouse royalty royal wedding russian court dress settings spain speech startling new evidence stuart swedish queen taiwan thailand tradition united kingdom videos von hofmannsthal wedding gown

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:13 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises