Royal Cousins

[norwegianne]

Originally Posted by Furienna

Victoria belonged to the house of Hannover. Her husband Albert was a Coburg.

Her mother was a Coburg.

[Royal Fan]

How is the Last Tsar (Nicholas II) Related to Elizabeth II

[Furienna]

Well, the Brittish queen Alexandra and the Russian empress Dagmar (Maria) were two sisters from Denmark. Only that made the Brittish king George V and Tsar Nikolai II cousins. I also believe, that Nikolai's wife, Alix of Hessen, was Brittish queen Victoria's granddaughter and thus related to the Brittish royals. If Nikolai had gotten grandchildren, they would have been Queen Elizabeth II's third cousins in two different ways.

[Lady Bluffton]

I've always been fascinated by these intricate and extremely intertwined family trees -- gives a new dimension to why maybe the leading royals are "marrying out" (i.e. commoners like Mary Donaldson, Maxima, etc.). New blood is needed! Imagine what a series of genetic marker tests would be like for some of our fave royals!?!

[Furienna]

Yes, the new blood is needed. It's no wonder that some diseases were so common among the royals back in the day. They could only marry their cousins!

[Toledo]

Originally Posted by morhange

Six modern monarchies have descendents from Queen Victoria: Great Britain of course, and Spain, Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Luxembourg. And Belgium is descended from the same family as Queen V, the Coburgs.

That is the best short explanation on royal links I have ever read anywhere! :)

[KikkiB]

Originally Posted by Lady Bluffton

I've always been fascinated by these intricate and extremely intertwined family trees -- gives a new dimension to why maybe the leading royals are "marrying out" (i.e. commoners like Mary Donaldson, Maxima, etc.). New blood is needed! Imagine what a series of genetic marker tests would be like for some of our fave royals!?!

I've also been thinking about the genetics of the royal families of Europe. I know that King Olav and CP Märtha asked a genetics-guy whether or not it was wise for them to marry, since they were first cousins.

But then again, there might be an advantage of the close relations. Say -heavens forbid - that someone should need a kidney or something, a match would more easily be found. At least I think so, with my minimal knowledge of the topic :)

[Toledo]

While checking a name of a Brazilian prince with google I found an interesting link that surpised me. Is about the legendary beauty, Princess Fawiza of Egypt who seems to be related, through her children, to the Brazilian Imperial family. Brazil's Prince Joaozinho of Braganza is the grandson of Fawiza of Egypt, former wife of the Shah of Iran. Thus, the current claimant of Iran is related to the Braganzas-Brazil by his half sister's side, the daugther of the Shah and Queen Fawiza.
Chirine Family Tree (the modern family link between the Royal House of Egypt and the Imperial House of Brazil)

Here are some more on the Imperial House of Brazil's connections to other royals.

[Toledo]

Originally Posted by Furienna

Yes, the new blood is needed. It's no wonder that some diseases were so common among the royals back in the day. They could only marry their cousins!

The European Royals need quite a few generations not to marry any more cousins to stop that dangerous family tradition.
I'll suggest during this century the Princes only marry contestants of the Miss World pageant and the Princeses mary only football/soccer players

[linneatherose]

Originally Posted by Lady Bluffton

I've always been fascinated by these intricate and extremely intertwined family trees -- gives a new dimension to why maybe the leading royals are "marrying out" (i.e. commoners like Mary Donaldson, Maxima, etc.). New blood is needed! Imagine what a series of genetic marker tests would be like for some of our fave royals!?!

I agree. Even if every young royal marries outside of the family lines, genetic flaws WILL show up repeatedly for a few generations at least. And I DON'T mean dyslexia.
Over the years there have been many studies done on the Amish and Quaker communities in the US, and the findings regarding genetic problems in intermarrying communities were SHOCKING! And some of these communities aren't as closely related as royals. Besides... for anyone non-royal, isn't marrying a cousin pretty taboo? Even "gross?" Why shouldn't the same apply for royals?
I'm glad to see all of this new blood. Hooray for all of the commoners coming into the royal houses! I hope every prince and princess finds a "Mary"!

[Furienna]

I believe it became gross and taboo for commoners to marry too close relatives many centuries ago, even if it still happened. But the more distinguished the family was, the more important it was, that you made a good match. The royals were the most distinguished of them all, of course, and they could only marry other royals. And soon, all the royals in Europe were related to each other, so it became more and more common for even first cousins to marry each other, and second, third and fourth cousins must have gotten married to each other all the time. Five Bernadotte princes have been rejected their royal titles and rights to the thrown because they married "common" women, but if they had married some of their relatives among Europe's princesses, even if they were their first cousins, it would have been okay. But it was worse in ancient Egypt. The pharaohs and their families were considered descendants of the god Horus, and it seems to have been common, that even half-siblings within that royal house married each other. They were divine after all, and they were only good enough for each other. And also, even if it was taboo for mere mortals to marry too close relatives, it was okay for half-gods like the royals. More modern royal houses have had similar ideas. Even if was taboo for commoners to marry close relatives, it was not only okay, but even the only thing to do, for royals.

[Lady Jennifer]

Originally Posted by Toledo

Now, this is a must have and must print out for everyone here! I just found one of the most complete PDF genealogical trees on the British Royals. If you view it with the browser you have to use the zoom in because I'm afraid it lists everybody. Enjoy:
http://www.achievements.co.uk/services/royal/RFT.pdf

Thats a great link. Thanks for sharing it. I'm always looking for family trees.

[Toledo]

Originally Posted by Furienna

I believe it became gross and taboo for commoners to marry too close relatives many centuries ago, even if it still happened. But the more distinguished the family was, the more important it was, that you made a good match. The royals were the most distinguished of them all, of course, and they could only marry other royals. And soon, all the royals in Europe were related to each other, so it became more and more common for even first cousins to marry each other, and second, third and fourth cousins must have gotten married to each other all the time. Five Bernadotte princes have been rejected their royal titles and rights to the thrown because they married "common" women, but if they had married some of their relatives among Europe's princesses, even if they were their first cousins, it would have been okay. But it was worse in ancient Egypt. The pharaohs and their families were considered descendants of the god Horus, and it seems to have been common, that even half-siblings within that royal house married each other. They were divine after all, and they were only good enough for each other. And also, even if it was taboo for mere mortals to marry too close relatives, it was okay for half-gods like the royals. More modern royal houses have had similar ideas. Even if was taboo for commoners to marry close relatives, it was not only okay, but even the only thing to do, for royals.

Royals in particular are like a mini town community that did not marry much out of their rank. Even nobles were often not good enough for a royal marriage. That did not stop neither Royals or Aristocrats from finding other ways to multiply with each other that did not involve wearing white. But the legal ones were limited to their own kin, thus the dangerous inbreeding. How do you think the facial traits became so exagerated in so many paintings of that period.
Now that marriage is a little more flexible I don't see why royal princes have to give up the titles for just making improvements with some much needed new DNA in the family.

[Toledo]

Originally Posted by Lady Jennifer

Thats a great link. Thanks for sharing it. I'm always looking for family trees.

Me too! I'll keep you in mind then when I stroll around the web looking for new or rare family trees. I'll pm them to you for your collection. I created a folder in my laptop to store them by country or timeline.

[Furienna]

Originally Posted by Toledo

Royals in particular are like a mini town community that did not marry much out of their rank. Even nobles were often not good enough for a royal marriage. That did not stop neither Royals or Aristocrats from finding other ways to multiply with each other that did not involve wearing white. But the legal ones were limited to their own kin, thus the dangerous inbreeding. How do you think the facial traits became so exagerated in so many paintings of that period.
Now that marriage is a little more flexible I don't see why royal princes have to give up the titles for just making improvements with some much needed new DNA in the family.

That's so true. We had a Prince Oskar in Sweden, who was disowned for marrying a lady-in-waiting named Ebba Munck af Fulkila. Her name suggests, that she was a noble lady, but not even that was good enough for a prince. But if he had married his cousin's daughter, like his brother Carl did, he would have remained a prince. Carl's and Ingeborg's daughters Astrid and Märta became ancestors of the Belgian and Norveigan royal houses respectively, while their cousins, Oscar's and Ebba's children, fell into oblivion as mere counts and countesses. It was just absurd. You weren't allowed to marry who you wanted, but you were allowed to marry your cousin! The new blood is very needed, and common-born queens like Silvia and Sonja could hardly have been better if they had been born as princesses, could they?

[morhange]

I think Queen Victoria would both agree and disagree with some of you!

I'm reading Grandmama of Europe by Theo Aronson, and I looked through some of the page that I've read, but I can't find where it was, so I'll do my best to paraphrase.

Queen V DID say she wished for some new blood in Europe's royal families, mostly because she was tired of all the blonde-haired, blue-eyed princes and princesses, and thought introducing some darker features would do them some good. She also believed that a marriage should be made for love, and not political reasons, and didn't like forcing her numerous grandchildren into politically advantageous marriages unless they were willing.

However she did say that she thought marrying within the family was a way to strengthen the royal bloodline. She figured if a prince was worried that such close blood relationships with a potential wife would cause genetic defects in the children, he would go out of his way to avoid her, and then marry some commoner or low-born countess (or princess) with no real royal blood, who would just bring in the very diseases he was trying to avoid.

I wouldn't say hemophilia in her descendants was caused by such close marriages, because it would have happened regardless of whether Alix and Ena had married into royalty or not. It might have been CAUSED by Victoria's being first cousins with Albert, but who knows.

[Lady Jennifer]

Originally Posted by morhange

Six modern monarchies have descendents from Queen Victoria: Great Britain of course, and Spain, Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Luxembourg. And Belgium is descended from the same family as Queen V, the Coburgs.

Leopold I of Belguim was Queen Victoria's uncle (brother to the Queen's mother) & the uncle of Prince Albert (brother to Albert's father). He was also the son-in-law of King George IV when he married Princess Charlotte....so he was also a cousin-in-law to Queen Victoria & nephew-in-law to his sister.

[SusanE]

Originally Posted by morhange

I wouldn't say hemophilia in her descendants was caused by such close marriages, because it would have happened regardless of whether Alix and Ena had married into royalty or not. It might have been CAUSED by Victoria's being first cousins with Albert, but who knows.

No, Albert and Victoria being first cousins had nothing to do with hemophilia because it is transmitted by the mother unless the father is a hemophiliac...and Albert was not a hemophiliac. Most experts feel that the hemophilia gene in Victoria was due to a sponataneous mutation. Here are some hemophilia basics:

Hemophilia is transmitted on the X chromosome and it is a recessive trait. Women have XX chromosomes and men have XY chromosomes. Each person gets 1 chromosome from each parent. A woman has XX chromosome so she can only pass an X chromosome onto her children. A man has XY and can pass either chromosome on so the father determines the child's sex. If the father passes the X, it's a girl and if the father passes the Y, it's a boy. Now let's look at a woman carrying hemophilia. The hemophilia gene will be on only 1 of her chromosomes so the carrier mother has a 50% chance of passing on the chromosome with hemophilia. If she passes the chromosome on to a daughter, that daughter will be a carrier. The daughter will not have hemophilia because she has a healthy X chromosome from her father. But if the mother passes that X chromosome on to a boy, he will be a hemophiliac. The only way for a female to be a hemophiliac is for her to be the daughter of a carrier and a hemophiliac. The daughter of a hemophiliac will always be a carrier because her father can only pass on an X chromosome with hemophilia on it. However a hemophiliac's sons will not have hemophilia because the hemophiliac father will pass on a Y chromosome and his wife will pass on a healthy X chromosome.

[crisiñaki]

Vittorio Emmanuele of Italy and Simeon of Bulgaria are first cousins, Simeon's mother was sister of VE's father...

Also Amadeo of Aosta is first cousin with Queen Sofia (like almost everybody else) because his mother was sister to King Pavlos I (Sofia's father) so Aimone is second cousin to Felipe, Cristina, Elena, Alexia, Pavlos, Nikolaos, Theodora and Phillippos...

Queen Sofia is also first cousin of Ernst August of Hannover so Juan Urdangarín de Borbón and Alexandra of Hannover are third cousins

[HRH Kerry]

1st cousins Felipe and Pavlos were roommates at Georgetown University in Washington, DC