May 24, 1819: Birth of Queen Victoria of the United Kingdom

Tags

King George III of the United Kingdom, King George IV of the United Kingdom, King William IV of the United Kingdom, Prince Leopold of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld, Princess Alexandrina Victoria of Kent, Princess Charlotte of Wales, Princess Victoria of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld., Queen Victoria of the United Kingdom of Great Britain, Royal Marriages Act of 1772, The Duke of Kent, the Duke of York, The Prince Regent

Following the death of Princess Charlotte-Augusta of Wales, only child of the Prince Regent and his wife, Princess Caroline of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel in November 1817, the royal succession began to look uncertain. Princess Charlotte-Augusta had been the only legitimate grandchild of George III at the time. The Prince Regent was estranged from his wife and had no other legitimate children.

Princess Charlotte-Augusta of Wales

Next in line after the Prince Regent was Prince Frederick the Duke of York and Albany. Prince Frederick had married his cousin, Princess Frederica-Charlotte of Prussia, the daughter of King Friedrich-Wilhelm II of Prussia and Elisabeth-Christine of Brunswick-Lüneburg at Charlottenburg, Berlin on September 29, 1791 and again on November 23, 1791 at Buckingham Palace. The marriage was not a happy one and the couple soon separated. Frederica retired to Oatlands, where she lived until her death in 1820.

Prince Frederick the Duke of York and Albany

King George III’s surviving daughters were all likely past childbearing age. The unmarried sons of King George III, the Duke of Clarence (later King William IV), the Duke of Kent, and the Duke of Cambridge, all rushed to contract lawful marriages and provide an heir to the throne. The fifth son of King George III, the Duke of Cumberland, was already married but had no living children at that time, whilst the marriage of the sixth son, the Duke of Sussex, was void because he had married in contravention of the Royal Marriages Act 1772.

However, it was not that simple. For the HRH Prince Edward, Duke of Kent, providing for the succession was not his sole motivator in finding a wife. Even before he disposed of his mistress, the amiable Madame de Saint Laurent, the Duke of Kent had been secretly looking for a legitimate wife for financial reasons rather than dynastic reasons. The Duke of Kent knew that once he contracted a legitimate marriage he would be granted a steady income by Parliament. Princess Charlotte-Augusta was still alive at this time and he promised her, along with her consort, Prince Leopold of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld, to furnish continuity for the throne of Hanover.

Prince Edward, Duke of Kent and Strathearn

The Duke of Kent also realized that in Hanover, where the Salic Law applied to the German kingdom, only male heirs could reign in Hanover, therefore, if Princess Charlotte-Augusta became Queen of the United Kingdom this would separate the personal union of the two countries and a secession of her oldest surviving childless uncles would, one after another, become the King of Hanover. The Duke of Kent envisioned that he would one day be the King of Hanover. For that he would need a Queen and an heir.

The Duke of Kent’s idea of a suitable bride was a wealthy woman with proper Royal Ancestry for an approved royal marriage. Because the Duke of Kent had been helpful to his niece, Princess Charlotte-Augusta of Wales, and her husband Prince Leopold, they were eager to match the Duke with Leopold’s younger sister the Dowager Princess of Leiningen.

Princess Victoria, Duchess of Kent and Strathearn

The Duke agreed to visit the widowed Princess Victoria in Darmstadt, one of the larger cities close to the borders of Amorbach, after which he dispatched a lengthy letter expressing his affection and proposing marriage, believing she would make an appropriate Queen of Hanover. With the death of Princess Charlotte-Augusta of Wales, who died giving birth to a stillborn son in November 1817, the Duke of Kent realized that the succession to the British throne was now in jeopardy and this expediated his marriage to the Dowager Princess of Leiningen.

In Coburg Germany, on May 29, 1818 at 9:30 in the evening the Dowager Princess of Leiningen (aged 32) was married in the Lutheran right to the Duke of Kent (aged 52) a man she had only met once before. The Duke was arrayed in his English field marshal’s uniform, while the Princess was resplendent in pale silk lace. Afterwards, the new Duchess of Kent wrote in her diary that she had hoped that in her second marriage she would find the happiness that she never found in the first.

Within four days after the wedding the Duke and Duchess of Kent left for England, and at Kew Palace on July 13, 1818 at four in the afternoon, they were married again this time in accordance to the Church of England. However, the ceremony was doubled for there was also two brides for the Prince Regent to give away. Not only was the Duke of Kent marrying Princess Victoria, Prince William, Duke of Clarence and the 25 year old Princess Adelaide of Saxe-Meiningen (August 13, 1792 – December 2, 1849) [the daughter of Georg I, Duke of Saxe-Meiningen and Luise-Eleonore of Hohenlohe-Langenburg] were united as well.

The Duchess of Kent and Strathearn and Princess Alexandrina-Victoria of Kent

Charles Manners-Sutton, the Archbishop of Canterbury, officiated the ceremony, assisted by William Howley, Bishop of London, himself Archbishop of Canterbury from 1828 to 1848. Since King George III was blind and incapacitated, fragile old Queen Charlotte, mother of both of the Dukes, was the chief celebrant at the wedding banquet.

Because of the Duke of Kent’s financial situation the newlyweds moved back to Germany. By November 18, 1818 the Duke of Kent sent a letter to the Prince Regent’s private secretary, Sir Benjamin Bloomfield, indicating that the Duchess of Kent was pregnant and that the child was due in May the following year. The Duke of Kent believed it would be his duty to bring the Duchess back to England early in April so that the Royal birth could take place in England. The Duke also petitioned his brother the Prince Regent to allocate funds sufficient for the move and the care of his growing family.

The Duke and Duchess of Kent’s only child was born at 4.15 a.m. on May 24, 1819 at Kensington Palace in London. The new Princess of Kent was christened privately by the Archbishop of Canterbury, on June 24, 1819 in the Cupola Room at Kensington Palace. She was baptised Alexandrina after one of her godparents, Emperor Alexander I of Russia, and Victoria, after her mother. Additional names proposed by her parents—Georgina (or Georgiana), Charlotte, and Augusta—were dropped on the instructions of Kent’s eldest brother, George, the Prince Regent.

Alexandrina-Victoria of Kent aged 16.

At birth, Princess Alexandrina-Victoria of Kent, was fifth in the line of succession after the four eldest sons of George III: George, the Prince Regent (later George IV); Frederick, the Duke of York; William, the Duke of Clarence (later William IV); and Victoria’s father, Edward, the Duke of Kent. The Prince Regent had no surviving children, and the Duke of York had no children; further, both were estranged from their wives, who were both past child-bearing age, so the two eldest brothers were unlikely to have any further legitimate children.

With Princess Alexandrina-Victoria of Kent being fifth in line to the succession to the throne, her ascending the British throne was not assured. She could have been supplanted by a brother born to the Duke and Duchess of Kent, or any children from the union of the Duke and Duchess of Clarence. However, the Duke of Clarence’s legitimate daughters died as infants. The first of these was Princess Charlotte of Clarence, who was born and died on March 27, 1819, two months before Victoria was born.

Coronation portrait of Queen Victoria

Following the birth of Princess Alexandrina-Victoria in May 1819, the Duke and Duchess, concerned to manage the Duke’s great debts, sought to find a place where they could live inexpensively. After the coast of Devon was recommended to them they leased from a General Baynes, intending to remain incognito, Woolbrook Cottage on the seaside by Sidmouth.

Death of the Duke of Kent

The Duke of Kent died of pneumonia on January 23, 1820 at Woolbrook Cottage, Sidmouth, and was interred in St. George’s Chapel, Windsor Castle. He died six days before his father, George III, and was succeeded by his eldest son as George IV. Alexandrina-Victoria was then third in line to the throne after her uncles the Dukes of York and Clarence.

The Duke Clarence’s second daughter was Princess Elizabeth of Clarence who lived for twelve weeks from December 10, 1820 to 4 March 1821 and, while Elizabeth lived, Alexandrina-Victoria was fourth in line. The Childless Duke of York died in 1827 which paved the way for Alexandrina-Victoria’s own succession after the reigns of her uncles, George IV (1820-1830) and William IV (1830-1837).

Official documents prepared on the first day of her reign described her as Alexandrina-Victoria, but the first name was withdrawn at her own wish and not used again, hence she became Queen Victoria for the entirety of her reign.

Family of Charles Wilhelm Ferdinand, Duke of Brunswick-Lüneburg. Part III.

Tags

Augusta of Great Britain, Caroline of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel, Charles William Ferdinand of Brunswick, Divorce, King George III of the United Kingdom, King William I of the Netherlands, Parliament, Prince William VI of Orange, Princess Charlotte of Wales, Queen of the United Kingdom, Royal Marriages Act of 1772

Caroline of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel (Caroline Amalie Elisabeth; May 17, 1768 – August 7, 1821) was Queen consort of the United Kingdom as the wife of King George IV from January 29, 1820 until her death in 1821. She was the Princess of Wales from 1795 to 1820.

Caroline was born a Princess of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel with the courtesy title of Duchess of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel, at Brunswick in the Holy Roman Empire. She was the daughter of Charles Wilhelm Ferdinand, Duke of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel, and his wife Princess Augusta of Great Britain, eldest sister of George III of Great Britain.

Caroline was brought up in a difficult family situation. Her mother resented her father’s open adultery with Louise Hertefeld, whom he had installed as his official mistress in 1777, and Caroline was later to confide to Lady Charlotte Campbell that she was often tired of becoming a “shuttlecock” between her parents, as whenever she was civil to one of them, she was scolded by the other.

Caroline could understand English and French, but her father admitted that she was lacking in education. According to Caroline’s British mother, all German princesses learned English in the hope that they would be chosen to marry George, Prince of Wales, George III’s eldest son and heir apparent and Caroline’s first cousin.

John Stanley, later Lord Stanley of Alderley, saw her in 1781, and noted that she was an attractive girl with curly, fair hair. In 1784, she was described as a beauty, and two years later, Mirabeau described her as “most amiable, lively, playful, witty and handsome.” Caroline was brought up with an extreme degree of seclusion from contact with the opposite sex even for her own time.

Caroline was given a number of proposals from 1782 onward. Marriage with the Prince Willem VI of Orange, (future king of the Netherlands) Prince Georg of Hesse-Darmstadt, Charles, Duke of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, and the second son of the Margrave of Baden were all suggested, while her mother and father supported an English and a Prussian Prince respectively, but none came to fruition.

Caroline was engaged to her first cousin, George, in 1794 despite the two of them never having met. He was already illegally married to Maria Fitzherbert. George had agreed to marry her because he was heavily in debt, and if he contracted a marriage with an eligible princess, Parliament would increase his allowance. Caroline seemed eminently suitable: she was a Protestant of royal birth, and the marriage would ally Brunswick and Britain. Although Brunswick was only a small country, Britain was at war with revolutionary France and so was eager to obtain allies on the European mainland.

George IV, King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, King of Hanover.

On meeting his future wife for the first time, George called for a glass of brandy. He was evidently disappointed. Similarly, Caroline told Malmesbury, “[the Prince is] very fat and he’s nothing like as handsome as his portrait.”

Caroline and George were married on April 8, 1795 at the Chapel Royal, St. James’s Palace, in London. At the ceremony, George was drunk. He regarded Caroline as unattractive and unhygienic, and told Malmesbury that he suspected that she was not a virgin when they married. He, of course, was not. He had himself already secretly married Maria Fitzherbert; however, his marriage to Fitzherbert violated the Royal Marriages Act 1772 and thus was not legally valid.

In a letter to a friend, the prince claimed that the couple only had sexual intercourse three times: twice the first night of the marriage, and once the second night. He wrote, “it required no small [effort] to conquer my aversion and overcome the disgust of her person.” Caroline claimed George was so drunk that he “passed the greatest part of his bridal night under the grate, where he fell, and where I left him”.

Nine months after the wedding, Caroline gave birth to Princess Charlotte, George’s only legitimate child, at Carlton House on January 7, 1796. Charlotte was second in the line of succession to the British throne after her father.

Gossip about Caroline and George’s troubled marriage began quickly circulating. The press vilified George for his extravagance and luxury at a time of war and portrayed Caroline as a wronged wife. She was cheered in public and gained plaudits for her “winning familiarity” and easy, open nature. George was dismayed at her popularity and his own unpopularity, and felt trapped in a loveless marriage with a woman he loathed. He wanted a separation.

By 1806, rumours that Caroline had taken lovers and had an illegitimate child led to an investigation into her private life. The dignitaries who led the investigation concluded that there was “no foundation” to the rumours, but Caroline’s access to her daughter was nonetheless restricted. In 1814, Caroline moved to Italy, where she employed Bartolomeo Pergami as a servant.

Pergami soon became Caroline’s closest companion, and it was widely assumed that they were lovers. In 1817, Caroline was devastated when Charlotte died in childbirth. She heard the news from a passing courier as George had refused to write and tell her. He was determined to divorce Caroline, and set up a second investigation to collect evidence of her adultery.

In 1820, George became King of the United Kingdom and Hanover. He hated his wife, vowed she would never be the queen, and insisted on a divorce, which she refused. A legal divorce was possible but difficult to obtain. Caroline returned to Britain to assert her position as queen. She was wildly popular with the British populace, who sympathised with her and despised the new king for his immoral behaviour.

On the basis of the loose evidence collected against her, George attempted to divorce her by introducing the Pains and Penalties Bill to Parliament, but he and the bill were so unpopular, and Caroline so popular with the masses, that it was withdrawn by the Liverpool government. In July 1821, Caroline was barred from the coronation on the orders of her husband. She fell ill in London and died three weeks later. Her funeral procession passed through London on its way to her native Brunswick, where she was buried.

On this Date in History: April 6, 1889. Death of Augusta of Hesse-Cassel, Duchess of Cambridge.

Tags

Augusta of Hesse-Cassel, Charlotte of Wales, Duchess of Cambridge, George III, George III of Great Britain, Kate Middleton, Kingdom of Hanover, Prince William, Prince William of Wales, Royal Marriages Act of 1772, United Kingdom, Viceroy

Today is the 130th anniversary of the death of the Duchess of Cambridge, (born Princess Augusta of Hesse-Cassel), on April 6, 1889.

Princess Augusta of Hesse-Cassel

Augusta was the Last holder of the title Duchess of Cambridge prior to the current Duchess of Cambridge. Augusta is the Great-Great-Great-Great-Grandmother of the current Duke of Cambridge.

Princess Augusta Wilhelmine Luise of Hesse-Cassel (July 25, 1797 – April 6, 1889) was the wife of Prince Adolphus, Duke of Cambridge, the tenth-born child, and seventh son, of George III of the United Kingdom and Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz. The longest-lived daughter-in-law of George III, she was the maternal grandmother of Mary of Teck, wife of George V of the United Kingdom.

HRH The Dowager Duchess of Cambridge

Princess and Landgravine Augusta of Hesse-Cassel, third daughter of Landgrave Friedrich of Hesse-Cassel and his wife, Princess Caroline of Nassau-Usingen, was born at Rumpenheim, Offenbach am Main, Hesse. Through her father, she was a great-granddaughter of George II of Great Britain, her grandfather having married George II’s daughter Mary. Her father’s older brother was the Landgrave of Hesse-Cassel. In 1803, her uncle’s title was raised to Imperial Elector of Hesse—whereby the entire Cassel branch of the Hesse dynasty gained an upward notch in hierarchy.

Marriage

Prince Adolphus Frederick, The Duke of Cambridge

On May 7, 1818 in Cassel, and then, again, on June 1, 1818 at Buckingham Palace, Princess Augusta married her second cousin, Prince Adolphus, Duke of Cambridge, when she was 20 and he 44. Their marriage was a result of the “rush to the alter” for the unmarried sons of George III after the death in childbirth of their niece Princess Charlotte of Wales the previous year. The death of Princess Charlotte meant there was no legitimate heir to the throne of the United Kingdom in the third generation.

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge had three children: George, 2nd Duke of Cambridge (1819-1904); Augusta of Cambridge (1822-1916)(who married Friedrich Wilhelm, Grand Duke of Mecklenberg-Strelitz); Mary Adelaide of Cambridge (1833-1897) (who married Prince Francis, Duke of Teck, the parents of Princess Mary of Teck wife of George V of the United Kingdom).

At this time in the history of the British Monarchy the King of the United Kingdom was also the King of Hanover, a state within the German Confederation of the Rhine. The union of these two crowns was a personal union and not a political union. Shortly after their marriage in 1818 the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge moved to Hanover where her husband served as viceroy on behalf of his brothers, George IV (1820-1830) and William IV (1830-1837). The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge returned to Great Britain, in 1837 when Prince Ernest-Augustus, Duke of Cumberland became King of Hanover (1837-1851).

Since Hanover was ruled by the Salic Law which barred women from inheriting the throne, Victoria (1837-1901) inherited the British throne and her uncle Prince Ernest-Augustus, Duke of Cumberland inherited the Hanoverian crown. With the King of Hanover now living in Hanover there was no longer a need for a Viceroy and therefore the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge returned to Britain where they lived at Cambridge Cottage, Kew, and later at St. James’s Palace.

Prince Ernest Augustus, Duke of Cumberland and King of Hanover

The Duke of Cambridge died on July 8, 1850 at Cambridge House, Piccadilly, London, at the age of 76 and was buried at St Anne’s Church, Kew. His remains were later removed to St George’s Chapel, Windsor Castle. His only son, Prince George, succeeded to his peerages. The 2nd Duke of Cambridge married privately and in contravention of the 1772 Royal Marriages Act at St. John’s Church, Clerkenwell, London, on January 8, 1847 to Sarah Fairbrother (1816 – January 12, 1890), the daughter of John Fairbrother, a servant in Westminster. As the marriage was contrary to the Royal Marriages Act, the Duke’s wife was not titled Duchess of Cambridge or accorded the style Her Royal Highness, nor was their son born after the marriage eligible to succeed to the Duke’s titles. This was why Augusta was the last Duchess of Cambridge until Kate Middleton married the current Duke of Cambridge, Prince William of Wales in 2011.

Death

The Duchess of Cambridge survived her husband by thirty-nine years, dying on April 6, 1889, at the age of ninety-one. Queen Victoria wrote of her aunt’s death: “Very sad, though not for her. But she is the last of her generation, & I have no longer anyone above me.”

Which Titles for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle?

Tags

1917 Letter's Patent, Duke of Albany, Duke of Clarence, Duke of Cumberland, Duke of Sussex, Duke of Windsor, Edward VIII, King George III, Meghan Markle, Prince Harry, Prince Henry of Wales, Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, Royal Marriages Act of 1772, Titles Deprivation Act 1919

The wedding of HRH Prince Harry and Meghan Markle has been announced to take place in May at St. George’s Chapel, Windsor Castle. 

One of the biggest speculations concerning the marriage is what Peerage Title the couple will receive. It has become the tradition with Her Majesty, the Queen, to elevate a member of the Royal Family to the Peerage by granting them a title of Nobility on their wedding day. Prince Andrew was created Duke of York at his wedding, Prince Edward was created Earl of Wessex at his wedding, and Prince William was created Duke of Cambridge at his; therefore it is logical to assume Prince Harry will also be granted a Peerage Title on his wedding day. 

But which one? The odds on favorite seems to be Duke of Sussex, followed by Duke of Clarence. There are also other options. The Dukedoms of Albany and Cumberland have been suggested but they are forever in limbo it seems. The last holders of these titles, Prince Charles-Edward, Duke of Albany 1884-1954  (later reigning Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha) along with Prince Ernest-Augustus II, Duke of Cumberland and Teviotdale 1845-1923 were deprived their Peerage titles in 1917 for bearing arms against the United Kingdom in World War I under the Titles Deprivation Act 1917.

Under the provisions of this Act the legitimate lineal male heir of the 1st Duke of Albany was allowed to petition the British Crown for the restoration of the peerages. Because subsequent descendants have married in contravention of the Royal Marriages Act 1772, there were theoretically no people alive who can make such a petition according to British Law. The last person eligible to petition the Crown was Prince Friedrich-Josia of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, who died in 1998. Since the the Royal Marriages Act 1772 was repealed by the subsequent Crown Act of 2013 it remains to be seen if the current heir, Prince Andreas of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, can Petition the Crown to regain this title.

In 1799 the double dukedom of Cumberland and Teviotdale, in the Peerage of Great Britain, was bestowed on Prince Ernest-Augustus, fifth son of King George III of the United Kingdom and Hanover. In 1837 Ernest-Augustus became King of Hanover and on his death in 1851 the title descended with the kingdom to his son King Georg V, and on Georg’s  death in 1878 to his grandson Ernst-August II. In 1866 Hanover was annexed by Prussia but King Georg V died without renouncing his rights. His son, Ernst-August II, not only maintained his claim to the kingdom of Hanover, he was generally known by his title of Duke of Cumberland.

The title was suspended for Ernst-August II’s pro-German activities during World War I under the 1917 Titles Deprivation Act as it was for his son (Prince Ernst-August III 1887-1953, reigning Duke of Brunswick). Under the Act the lineal male heirs of the 3rd Duke of Cumberland and Teviotdale have the right to petition the British Crown for the restoration of his peerages. To date, none have done so. The present heir and current head of the House of Hanover is Prince Ernst-August V (born 26 February 1954), great-grandson of Prince Ernst-August II, 3rd Duke of Cumberland and Tiveotdale. He is the senior male-line descendant of George III of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. It is very unlikely that the current head of the House of Hanover will petition the Crown to have this title restored.

Unless these two Dukedoms are formally and legally renounced these titles will likely remain in limbo. Dukedoms such as Connaught belong to Ireland where the Queen no longer reigns so that Dukedom is no longer an option. The Dukedom of Windsor is so associated (tainted) with King Edward VIII the chance it ever being re-created for another British Royal is highly unlikely.

There is also the possibility that the Queen will grant the royal couple a lesser title such as Earl or even Marquess. At this time Prince Harry is 5th in line to the throne. The Duchess of Cambridge is due to give birth to their third child in April and if all goes as planned this will make Prince Harry 6th in line to the British throne. Since Prince Harry will be further down in the order of succession a lesser title becomes a possibility, however slight it is. 

I know they’re not even married yet but I need to mention the titles of any subsequent Children. Under the provisions of the 1917 Letter’s Patent any children born to the Royal Couple during the life time of the Queen will NOT have a royal title. Under the provisions of the 1917 Letter’s Patent the royal title is limited to the grandchildren of The sovereign in the male line. Prince Harry and Meghan’s children will be great-grandchildren in the male line of the sovereign thus making them ineligible for a title.

The Act only provided a title for a great-grandchild in the male line of the sovereign when that child is the eldest son, of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales. In this instance, Prince George of Cambridge. The Queen did amend the 1917 Letter’s Patent to include ALL children of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.

The Queen could do something similar with the children of Prince Harry and Meghan. However, in the long run it won’t be necessary. Any children born during the reign of the Queen will automatically gain the title Prince/Princess of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland when the Queen passes away; for they will no longer be great-grandchildren of the sovereign, they will be the grandchildren of the new sovereign, King Charles III.

 

 

 

Limits of Power for Exiled Royal Families: Conclusion

Tags

Abdication, King Edward VIII of the United Kingdom, King Michael of Romania, Prince George Friedrich of Prussia, Prince Louis-Ferdinand of Prussia, Royal Marriages Act of 1772, The Kingdom of Portugal, The Prince of Prussia

On December 30, 2007, King Michael signed a new Statute of the Royal House, called Fundamental Rules of the Royal House of Romania. These new House Laws were implicitly based on European Union type of legislation, specifically those laws which addresses the European Convention on Human Rights, which, however, does not guarantee any right to reign as a monarch of any country, and also on the values of the Romanian society. The document clarifies the order of inheritance of King Michael’s fortune and rights to the Romanian throne. This new Statute, thought by some to be undemocratic because it was not approved by any Parliament, is mostly symbolic but it does attempt to replace the old 1884 Statute Law. According to this new Statute, the first in line of succession is King Michael’s eldest daughter, newly titled “Crown Princess of Romania” and “Custodian of the Romanian Crown,” Princess Margarita. In 1997 King Michael had already designated her as successor to “all” his “prerogatives and rights”, indicating his desires for a gender-blind succession to the throne.

The argument has been made that Crown Princess Margarita will only become head of the royal family because King Michael, as a constitutional monarch, is unable to alter the old and inoperative succession laws which had excluded females and their descendants. King Michael was not and is not an absolute monarch who could rule via the strength of his will. It is only the Romanian Parliament that could ameliorate these laws along with the Constitution where these precepts had been included. Also, the Romanian Parliament will not alter the succession to a monarchy that no longer exists. In order to legally alter the succession the monarchy would need to be restored. There is however, an alternative view which finds that Michael is able to alter these succession laws alone, effectively making him an absolute monarch. This view stems from the rreality of the fact that during his second reign, Michael neither was sworn into office by any Parliament, nor did he take any oath to any Constitution. Instead King Michael was instead anointed king by the Romanian Orthodox Church. The second opinion ignores the fact that Michael never personally claimed to be an absolute monarch, nor had he acted as such, and he always supporting democracy and the constitutional monarchy.

During the week this came in over the news….This is copied from Royal Central…

“In a statement released yesterday, Romania’s King Michael has withdrawn his grandson’s royal title. The former Prince Nicolae of Romania, once third in succession to the throne, and only grandson of the ninety-three-year-old king will now be known as Mr. Nicholas Medforth-Mills. He became third in line to the throne on April 1st, 2010 at the age of twenty-five.

King Michael reached this conclusion by observing his grandson’s behavior in public and in private. Ioan Luca Vlad explained further, “When you are in public, you must have a certain attitude, you must comply with certain norms. If you do this, but you are not happy with it, this won’t last long, so you must make a preventive step,”

The king is merely thinking of the future, stated the Royal House’s representatives. It isn’t a punishment for the former prince, who was in agreement with his grandfather’s decision. Mr. Methford-Mills issued his statement, “The royal life means leading my life in a way I find hard to accept,” he said. “For this reason, I accept with a lot of pain in my heart the decision of His Majesty King Michael for me.”

I have given it some great thought. One problem, as I already stated it, is that these House Laws/Constitutions were written at a time when these thrones were extant. This forever sets them in stone and there is no legal means to change them. If these families were still reigning there would be a legal means of altering the House Laws.

In the majority of these former ruling families, most holding their titles in pretense, there is still considerable wealth and estates to consider and who should inherit these vast holdings are some of the problems the heads of these former ruling families face. In the past these issues were decided legally and while the courts today can rule on these issues they do not have jurisdiction over the claims of titles and thrones that no longer exist. There are limits.

Many of these former ruling families had strict marriages laws/requirements and rules on who was and was not a dynast. Why does this still matter? As I mentioned there is still wealth and land to be inherited but more than that, some of these former reigning families still hold places of privilege and high profile levels of service to their country. The heirs to the thrones of Romania, Serbia, Germany and Portugal all have some relationships with the government either on a national level or local level. For instance, the wedding of the pretender to the Portuguese throne was televised and attended by the Prime Minister and the President of Portugal as well as other foreign dignitaries. When the Prince of Prussia, heir to the German Empire, married in 2011 the religious wedding was broadcast live by local public television. The formal dinner, which many members of German and European royal families attended, was held in the Orangery Palace at Sanssouci Park.

There still is a lot at stake. For instance, the Prince of Prussia (Prince Georg-Friedrich) was under a lot of pressure to marry someone of equal status after his great-great grandfather, Kaiser Wilhelm II, placed a stipulation in his will that only those of equal marriage were eligible to inherit his vast wealth and headship of the Royal House. The eldest children of Prince Georg-Friedrich’s grandfather, Prince Louis-Ferdinand (1907-1994), did not marry equally so Prince Louis-Ferdinand named his grandson (born of an equal marriage) as heir to the estate and the Headship of the Royal House. This was contested in the courts by Prince Georg-Friedrich’s uncles and although he eventually won, he too, had to marry equally. His wife, the current Princess of Prussia, was born Her Serene Highness Princess Sophie of Isenburg. Although the court could rule on the inheritance it could not rule on the Headship of the Royal House because the monarchy was no longer existing so it had no jurisdiction over pretense to titles.

Times have changed and monarchies in order to survive also need to change with the times. In 1936 King Edward VIII of the United Kingdom of Great Britain had to abdicate in order to marry the woman he loved. This caused great scandal. Today, attitudes on divorce and equal marriage have changed. When the Prince of Wales married his former mistress in 2005 it was accepted by most. When Crown Prince Haakon of Norway married a woman that had had a child from a previous relationship, it was accepted although it did cause a minor uproar. If these former ruling families want to stay relevant and not disappear into the dust bins of history I think they need to be allowed to change and adapt.

I don’t think old House Laws and Constitutions need to tie the hands of these Heads of former reigning Houses. For practical reasons they should not. As we have seen issues and problems do come up in these families and they do need to be addressed and I think the Heads of former reigning Houses need to have some freedom to address these problems and change the Laws as the times change.

Survival of Monarchies: Part X, Conclusions.

Tags

Charles of Austria, Constitutional Monarchy, Emperor Carl of Austria, France, Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany, King Louis XVI of France, Royal Marriages Act of 1772, The Succession to the Crown Act of 2013, United Kingdom

This has been a very long series. Here is the conclusion. As stated in the beginning my premise for the survival of the monarchies that are extant is due to a more Liberal political view that allowed these systems to adapt and change with the times. These are also the reasons why these systems are continuing to survive. For example, the United Kingdom followed the direction the Scandinavian and Benelux monarchies have gone in regards to gender neutrality for the succession to the crown. In the future the eldest child will inherit the throne regardless of gender. For a further example, if the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s new baby is a girl, she will follow Prince George and become fourth in line to the throne as she would have under the old laws. However, she will not be moved down in the succession by any future younger brothers. The Succession to the Crown Act of 2013 has finally gone into affect once Australia finally approved it. Other more Liberal provisions of the Act was to repeal the Royal Marriages Act of 1772 so now only the first 6th in line to the throne have to ask permission of the sovereign to marry. The Act also restored to the order of succession those who had married Catholics. So as long as a Prince or Princess married a Catholic they will no longer lose their place in the succession. However, if a British Prince or Prince converts to the Catholic faith or is baptized into the faith they will lose their place in the succession.

We have seen that in Britain they went from an almost absolute monarchy under the Tudors to the Constitutional Monarchy they have today. Although it was a very rough road to get to where we are today the monarchy did survive because it was able to adapt to the changing political philosophies of the day. We saw the same thing in Denmark although with much less bloodshed. In Denmark the king took over the power and when the people desired a Constitution with a monarch that had lesser power it was granted easily. When King Christian IX (1863-1906) tried to wield more power than he had he was very unpopular for it and almost lost his crown. His ability to adapt to how things were helped save that crown.

Russia, Austria-Hungary and the German Empire (and France) all fell during times of war but the staunch Conservatism and the inability to change lead to the downfall of each. Both Czar Nicholas II of Russia and King Louis XVI lost their thrones and lives during revolutions. Brief periods of Constitutional Monarchy were attempted but each monarch were used to centuries of personal autocracy and the sharing of power was seen as being beneath them. Plus, these bodies (Parliaments) were not very trusting of their sovereigns either. Kaiser’s Wilhelm II and Carl I-IV lost their thrones because the people no longer wanted them. I think this point cannot be over stressed. Both Germany and Austria-Hungry clung to a type of autocracy that had fallen out of favor over a century.

I think it brings up a good point to close with. It is important that monarchies bend to the changing times for the most important lesson learned with the collapse of these more Conservative regimes is that the monarchs govern by the will of the people and if and when the people no longer desire them they will be gone. I think today’s monarchs realize this very important fact. In that context I think these monarchies do provide their countries with something the people do need. I have gone over this briefly and I will restate it here: Symbolism and Patriotism are important to any country and having a head of state that is above the partisan game playing and bickering and who is a symbol and unifying factor can be of great value to the people. As long as they can find ways to remain meaningful in the lives of their country and adapt to the changing needs of the country and remaining an anchor for stability then the people will desire to keep them around.

The Other Prince George of Cambridge…

Tags

Duke of Cambridge, George III of Great Britain, Louise Fairbrother, Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, Prince George Duke of Camdridge, Queen Victoria, Queen Victoria of the United Kingdom, Royal Marriages Act of 1772

The new Prince George of Cambridge, son of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and currently third in line to the British Throne was not the only Prince George of Cambridge. The first prince of that name was the Grandson of King George III and son of Adolphus-Frederick, Duke of Cambridge and his wife, Princess Augusta of Hesse-Kassel. Prince George of Cambridge was also the uncle to Queen Mary, consort to King George V of Great Britain. He was also first Cousin to Queen Victoria.

George became Duke of Cambridge in 1850 with the death of his father. The Duke was an army officer by profession and served as served as Commander-in-Chief of the Forces (military head of the British Army) from 1856 to 1895. He became Duke of Cambridge in 1850 and field marshal in 1862. At one point in his life his uncle, King William IV and his father  Adolphus-Frederick, Duke of Cambridge, wanted to see him marry the future Queen Victoria. Both Prince George and Queen Victoria were born in 1819 with George being a few months older. However, the Coburg side of the family, especially Victoria’s maternal uncle, King Leopold I of the Belgians, had other plans for her marriage. It was the plans of the Belgian king that won out as Victoria fell in love and married her maternal first cousin, Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha.

Prince George seemed to have inherited the love of the ladies like his father and other Hanoverian uncles. He seemed to have a string of mistresses and lovers even after his marriage which was not in accord with the 1772 Royal Marriages Act. According to the Act permission from the monarch was necessary for the marriage to be legal. George did not seek such permission. George did not believe in arranged marriages and felt that they were doomed to failure. Even though his marriage was not legally recognized he did marry at St. John’s Church, Sarah Fairbrother (1816–12 January 1890), the daughter of John Fairbrother, a servant in Westminster.

Sarah Fairbrother

George and Sarah had three children but because the marriage was in violation of the 1772 Royal Marriages Act none of the children were able to succeed to the Duke’s titles. Indeed, Sarah’s very existence was ignored by the Queen Victoria.  Instead, Sarah called herself “Mrs. Fairbrother” and eventually “Mrs. FitzGeorge.” FitzGeorge was the name the children also took. Despite this “marriage” George had many other affairs during his life time.

His prominent military career that ended in 1895 after George criticised the administration of the War Office. He was then asked to resign. He outlived Queen Victoria but rode in a carriage in her funeral due to his own poor health. He visited Germany for the last time in 1903 and in 1904 he died of a haemorrhage of the stomach. His remains were buried five days later next to those of Mrs. FitzGeorge in Kensal Green Cemetery London.

His title, Duke of Cambridge, became extinct until it was recreated 107 years later for Prince William of Wales, George’s great-great-great-great nephew.

2012 A Royal Year in Review

Tags

2012. Parliament, Act of Settlement 1701, Cathedral of Our Lady of Luxembourg, Claire Lademacher, Countess Stéphanie de Lannoy, Diamond Jubilee, Duke of Edinburgh, Elizabeth II, Hereditary Grand Duke Guillaume, King Harald V of Norway, King Juan Carlos of Spain, Kings and Queens of England, Margrave of Meissen, Mrs. Lorentzen, Prince Albert of Saxony, Prince Alexander of Saxe-Gessaphe, Prince Félix of Luxembourg, Prince Maria Emanuel, Prince Philip, Prince William, Princess Ragnhild of Norway, Queen Elizabeth II, Queen Margarethe II of Denmark, Royal Marriages Act of 1772, The Duchess of Cambridge

I am back posting! I had some computer problems so that explains my absence. It has been quite a royal year! It seems like it was one of the busiest royal years in my recent memory.

We had two jubilees. Her Majesty Queen Margarethe II of Denmark celebrated 40 years on the Danish throne and of course Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II celebrated her diamond jubilee as she celebrated 60 years on the British throne and moves ever so closer to being Britain’s longest reigning monarch. There were many celebrations throughout the year culminating in the regatta sailing along the Themes. HRH The Duke of Edinburgh, age 91, gave a scare a few times as he was in and out of the hospital with a bladder infection. The Olympics were also held in London and Her Majesty opened the ceremony and even participated in a fun little filmed skit with Daniel Craig as James Bond. Toward the end of the year Her Majesty missed the Christmas service due to a lingering cold. I hope Her Majesty gets some rest because she was looking a bit tired and worn out toward the end of the year.

As the Queen of the United Kingdom was basking in her popularity, His Majesty, King Juan Carlos of Spain, had a not so stellar year. He broke his hip in a hunting accident while he was with his mistress and at a time when Spain is suffering severe economic hardships. He is still trying to recover his image.

There were also losses this past year. Princess Ragnhild of Norway, Mrs. Lorentzen, died in September at the age of 82. She was the sister to His Majesty King Harald V of Norway.

HRH Prince Maria Emanuel, Margrave of Meissen pretender to the throne of Saxony died in July. The claims to the vacant throne are contested between his brother, Prince Albert of Saxony and his nephew, Prince Alexander of Saxe-Gessaphe. However, Prince Albert died a few months after his brother died this October. The claims to the throne are still be contested by other branches of the Wettin Family.

There was a royal wedding in Luxumbourg when the HRH The Hereditary Grand Duke Guillaume married Countess Stéphanie de Lannoy on October 20, 2012 at the Cathedral of Our Lady of Luxembourg. Guillaume’s brother, Prince Félix of Luxembourg, announced his engagement to the German-born Claire Lademacher on December 13.

Another big story of 2012 was the announcement of the pregnancy of HRH The Duchess of Cambridge. This announcement also required pushing through changes of the succession laws to a gender neutral succession and getting rid of the ban against marrying Catholics along with the requirement for seeking the monarch’s consent to marry. All of these are very historical changes in the succession to the British monarchy!

All in all a very busy year with many changes. I am really looking forward to the events of 2013 and wait with anticipation for the birth of the 3rd in line to the British throne.

King William IV of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. King of Hanover. Part III

Tags

Anthony FitzClarence, Buckingham Palace, Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz., Clarence House, David Cameron, Dorothea Bland, Duke of Clarence, Earl of Munster, England, George IV, George Washington, Horatio Nelson, House of Commons, House of Lords, King Ernst-August of Hanover, King George III of Great Britain, Kings and Queens of England, kings and queens of the United Kingdom, Mrs. Jordan, Prince Charles, Prince of Wales, Princess Charlotte of Wales, Privy Council, Queen Victoria, Reform Bill of 1832. Charles Grey 2nd Earl Grey, Royal Marriages Act of 1772, The Duchess of Kent, William IV of the United Kingdom

When William became king he wanted to be known as Henry IX (he was christened William Henry) until it was pointed out that the last Stuart pretender, Henry, Cardinal York, was known as Henry IX by his supporters. Cardinal York died in 1807 and that was recent enough for him to change his mind and call himself William IV. The new king was very popular with his subjects at first. He was very down to earth and even would walk the streets of London and Brighton without any security and was found to be very approachable. When he was in Brighton he would send for gusts from the local hotels and invite them to dinner and would not care too much for proper dress and protocol. He also did away with a lot of the pomp and circumstance and the overt display of monarchy that was the rule under his brothers kingship. His coronation was also less extravagant and has become known as the half-crown-ation.

William was 64 years old when he became king and is Britain’s oldest monarch to succeed to the throne. He did not reign for a long time, only seven years, but his reign is seen as significant as he presided over large changes within society and the government, forging Britain into a more modern nation. The Duke of Wellington was the kings first Prime Minister and Wellington said that William was such a hard worker that he had done more work with the king in 10 minutes than he had with his brother, George IV, after years of working with him. Lord Brougham described William IV as a superior man of business who would ask questions to ensure that he understood a matter and this was different from the practice of George IV who feared asking questions lest he appeared to be ignorant.

Although William and Adelaide did not have any children his illegitimate children took up a good deal of his time and attention. He created his eldest son, George, 1st Earl of Munster. He had a troubled relationship with his sons who were constantly looking to their father for money and titles and opportunities for power. This created many quarrels between father and sons. His daughters were said to be beautiful and caused no undue stress for their royal father. During his reign the heir to the British throne was his niece, Princess Victoria of Kent, and although he was fond of his niece there was great animosity between the king and Victoria’s mother, the Duchess of Kent. This conflict meant that Victoria was rarely seen at court.

The largest political battle of William’s reign came within his first year on the throne. Shortly after his accession a general election was called. After a bitter battle the Duke of Wellington was defeated and Charles Grey, 2nd Earl Grey had become Prime Minister. Because of the conflicts and problems during this election the need to reform the process, which had not been modified since the 15th century, was evident. The system was abused. The aristocracy often controlled the elections to the Commons because as landholders the members and potential members of the House of Commons were often their tenants.

The First Reform Bill was defeated in the House of Lords and Earl Grey wanted the king to dissolve Parliament and call for new elections. William hesitated because a general election had just been held the prior year. It also placed him in a bind because the House of Lords was debating a resolution that would prevent the king from dissolving Parliament and they were resistant to any reform that would reduce their power. At the request of the Prime Minister, William drove to Parliament, donned the crown, and in the face of great opposition by members such as Lord Londonderry who brandished a whip and threatened violence, he personally declared Parliament dissolved.

Matters grew worse as the Second Reform Bill was also blocked in the House of Lords and discontent grew throughout the country. Minor riots broke out and Earl Grey wanted again to push through reform and face the House of Lords. He asked William to create enough liberal peers to ensure that the Bill would pass in the House of Lords. William agreed to the proposal and created a number of new peers. There were now enough peers for the Reform Bill to pass but these new peers placed enough amendments onto the Reform Bill that they too thwarted the Prime Minister’s plans.

Earl Grey asked one again that William create enough peers for the Reform Bill to pass the House of Lords in its entirety without amendments. William refused to do the prime Minister’s bidding this time and Earl Grey and his entire Cabinet resigned, sinking the monarchy, and specifically William IV, to an all time low in popularity. William desired that the Duke of Wellington should return to his former position but he did not have enough support in the Commons so William had no choice but to ask for Grey’s reinstatement. Grey returned to office and the House of Lords was more complacent knowing that the king was now agreeing to flood their membership with liberal peers. The Reform Bill passed unamended in 1832. During the crisis William had mud thrown at his carriage and was booed at and hissed at. Eventually the blame for the king’s actions were placed on the influence of the queen and the Duke of Cumberland and the kings popularity rose once again.

William was a member of the House of Hanover and his great-great grandfather, King George I of Great Britain, loved Hanover more than Britain. Although William had visited Hanover in his youth he did not step foot in his other kingdom during his tenure as king. Instead, William was represented in Hanover by a viceroy, HRH The Duke of Cambridge, a role he had played through the reign of George IV. Although ruled by the same monarch they were not politically united. During William’s reign Hanover was part of the Confederation of the Rhine, the successor state of the Holy Roman Empire. Austrian minister Metternich had considerable influence over Hanover at this time. Twice he implemented reforms in Hanover which Lord Palmerston did not support. When asked by Palmerston, then Prime Minister of Britain, to block these reforms in Hanover, William refused which was his prerogative as King of Hanover.

In April of 1837 William’s daughter, Sophia, Lady de L’Isle, died in childbirth leaving the frail king shaken and depressed. His health began to decline further. At a dinner reception in May another conflict occurred and he publicly humiliated the Duchess of Kent where he said he hoped he lived long enough to live past princess Victoria’s 18th birthday to avoid the Duchess of Kent from becoming regent. The king was successful in this endeavor. Victoria turned 18 on May 24. William IV passed away on June 20, 1837 at the age of 71. This ended the personal union of the Untied Kingdom and Hanover. The British throne went to his niece, Victoria, and since women were barred against serving as the monarch in Hanover, that crown went to his brother the Duke of Cumberland who became King Ernst-August of Hanover.

His reign was short but significant. He oversaw needed Parliamentary reforms and it was one of the last times when a British monarch would be this active in party politics. He lead an interesting life and was an ordinary man place in extraordinary circumstances.

King William IV of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, King of Hanover. Part II

Tags

Buckingham Palace, Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz., Clarence House, David Cameron, Dorothea Bland, Duke of Clarence, Earl of Munster, England, George IV, George Washington, Horatio Nelson, House of Commons, House of Lords, King George III of Great Britain, Kings and Queens of England, kings and queens of the United Kingdom, Mrs. Jordan, Prince Charles, Prince of Wales, Princess Charlotte of Wales, Privy Council, Royal Marriages Act of 1772, TagsAnthony FitzClarence, William IV of the United Kingdom

During the first part of 19th century, after his naval career had ended, the Duke of Clarence spent considerable time in the House of Lords. He took a controversial stance on the slave trade, although illegal in Britain it was still legal in many of their colonies. The Duke did not think freedom would be beneficial to the slaves. He mentioned that in his travels he had seen many freemen in utter poverty. At one point, in a speech concerning the abolitionists, he directed an insult to the leading abolitionist “the proponents of the abolition are either fanatics or hypocrites, and in one of those classes I rank Mr. Wilberforce“.

In 1817 tragedy struck the British royal family. Princess Charlotte of Wales, daughter of the Prince of Wales (who had become the Prince regent in 1811) died in childbirth along with her stillborn son. This left no legitimate heir in the generation beyond the 12 surviving children of George III. With the succession in jeopardy many of the royal dukes bade farewell to their mistresses in an effort to secure the succession to the throne.

The Duke of Clarence’s relationship with Mrs Jordan ended in 1811. Mrs Jordan was paid a handsome financial settlement and kept custody of her daughters under the condition she did not resume her stage work. She did however, resume her work as an actress to help pay of some debts of one of her son-in-laws (husband to one of her daughters prior to her relationship with William). This resulted in losing her payments from the Duke of Clarence. She retired to Paris and died in poverty in 1816.

William was 52 in 1817 and his choices of suitable women of childbearing age were slim. William’s brother, Prince Augustus, Duke of Cambridge, found   Princess Augusta of Hesse-Cassel, for William to marry but her father, Landgrave Friederich III of Hesse-Cassel, refused the match. In the end the Duke of Cambridge ended up marrying Princess Augusta himself. William eventually found a suitable princess to marry him, Princess Adelaide of Saxe-Meiningen the daughter of Georg I, Duke of Saxe-Meiningen and Eleonore of Hohenlohe-Langenburg. They were married on July 11, 1818 at Kew Palace in double ceremony along with his brother, Prince Edward, Duke of Kent and Princess Victoire of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld.

The union of William and Adelaide was a happy one despite the age difference, and despite the fact that she had to be step-mother to her husband’s illegitimate children. Motherhood, however, would be denied as only two children, Charlotte and Elizabeth, were born but lived only months.

On January 1820 King George III died after a long reign of 59 years. The Duke of Clarence became second in line to the throne . His eldest brother was now King George IV. George was estranged from his wife, Caroline of Brunswick, and she was past child bearing years. The next in line to the throne was William’s brother, Prince Frederick, Duke of York. The Duke of York was married to the eccentric Princess Wilhelmine of Prussia. This union was childless and the couple were estranged. This increased the likelihood that William would one day become king. Because of that awareness William began to take better care of himself and stopped drinking alcohol.

In 1827 William moved a step closer to the throne with the death of his brother, Frederick, Duke of York. William was now 62. He also returned to navy life that year when the Prime Minister, George Canning, appointed William to the office of Lord High Admiral. The office of had been in commission and while it had been in commission the office was exercised by a board. The last time an individual held the office was in 1709. His tenure in the post was short lived and tumultuous. His council consisted of Admiralty officers and they were often in conflict. The conflicts came to a head in 1828 when William put out to sea a squadron of ships that were gone for 10 days without word of where they were heading and for how long they would be gone. His brother, George IV communicated through the Prime Minister,  Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington, that his brother should be relieved of command and he demanded his resignation; the Duke of Clarence complied.

William spent the next three years back in the House of Lords and supported the Catholic Emancipation Act which would remove the restrictions placed on Roman Catholics. William supported the bill while his brothers, the Duke of Cumberland and the King, did not. As rumors of Civil War in Ireland grew over these religious restrictions support for the Bill increased and it was passed in 1829. By that time it was clear that the king was in bad health and would not live long. On the morning of June 26, 1830 King George IV died leaving his brother, HRH the Duke of Clarence, king. 

I will post again on Thursday, Thanksgiving Day here in the US and complete my look at William IV and cover his reign as king.