The Royal Marriages Act of 1772 and Royal Marriages


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
I believe that times have changed since 1772 and so has the monarchy so I think that it should be tweaked a bit because what if prince william and Kate have two girls like Andrew because william carries the genes to have:
Boy/boy
Girl/girl
Boy/girl
I mean do they propose to keep it the way it is? What if the monarchy comes to a point where only 3 princesses are born,who would inherit the throne?
 
It's House of Hanover (especially if you want to research it; House of Hannover is an entertainment conglomerate).
 
Last edited:
Grandduchess24 said:
I mean do they propose to keep it the way it is? What if the monarchy comes to a point where only 3 princesses are born,who would inherit the throne?
Click to expand...

The oldest of the the princesses, as happened when Queen Elizabeth II succeeded to the throne over her younger sister. There was actually a good deal of discussion about that in the 1930s. A legal opinion was sought, which stated that "in the event of the demise of His present Majesty, without issue male, leaving two or more daughters him surviving, the Crown would descend to the eldest of those daughters."
 
Royal Marriages to Illegitimates?

At the time King Edward VIII wed Bessie Warfield, were English Kings (or Queens) allowed to wed spouses of illegitimate birth, and maintain their Crown? If then not allowed, has the rule changed; and if so, when? And what was the reasoning behind the change? What was the kinship relationship of New Orleans assistant City Attorney, Peregrine 'Perry' Snowden Warfield, Esq., from Georgetown, D.C.; and said Bessie Warfield?
 
focusoninfinity said:
At the time King Edward VIII wed Bessie Warfield, were English Kings (or Queens) allowed to wed spouses of illegitimate birth, and maintain their Crown? If then not allowed, has the rule changed; and if so, when? And what was the reasoning behind the change? What was the kinship relationship of New Orleans assistant City Attorney, Peregrine 'Perry' Snowden Warfield, Esq., from Georgetown, D.C.; and said Bessie Warfield?
Click to expand...


As far as I am aware there has never been a ban on marriage to an illegitimate child.
 
There is no ban or laws banning a marriage to a person born out of wedlock for British royals. I would imagine the same is true for other European royal households. A person born out of wedlock can not be an heir to the throne. I don't recall reading in any British royal history book that such a law ever existed or if it was just something that wasn't written down but understood (gentlemen's type of agreement).

The heir to the throne or any royal can marry someone who was born out of wedlock, someone who had a child out of wedlock, someone whose parents divorced or they were divorced or someone who didn't grow up with their biological parents or someone who was adopted and had royalty in their ancestry.

There is no prohibition against marriage to these individuals even though in some cases it has raised eyebrows or people have questioned whether the royal should marry such an individual as their character comes into question (especially on the issue of divorce or having a child out of wedlock). A high percentage of these cases have been females who were not royal.
 
The marriage of Queen Victoria and Prince Albert

I've been looking at a list of marriages that were approved under the royal marriages act listed on wikipedia and then recordng them on my "Royal Family Tree"
One glaring ommision seems to be the marriage of Victoria and Albert.
Its fairly obvious that if Victoria had married before her uncles George IV and William IV had died, she would have required their permission to marry.
However Since she was the reigning monarch at the time she would have had to ask permission of herself to marry.
Now clearly there can be no question that she would have given herself permission to marry, but were the conditions of the royal marriage act actualy complied with?
I believe that when couples who are subject to the Royal Marriages act want to get married there is a procedure that is followed which eventualy leads to a document being produced showing citing the monarchs approval.
Was Victoria by virtue of being Queen exempt from this procedure?
I imagine she was but would love to hear other peoples views.
 
Marriages without RMA approval

I have been doing some more work on the Royal Marriages Act and found 18 marriages that I think should have got approval but didnt. They are as follows:-

Descendant Approval Not Sought Spouse.Name Date Of Marriage Notes
1 George Augustus Frederick OF HANOVER To Maria Smythe ( Mrs) FITZHERBERT 15 December 1785 it is generaly accepted that George and Mrs Fitzherbert contracted a marriage that would not have gained approval as Mrs Fitzherbert was twice divorced and Catholic.
2 Augustus Frederick OF HANOVER To Augusta MURRAY 4 April 1793
3 George William Frederick Charles OF HANOVER To Sarah Louisa FAIRBROTHER 8 January 1847
4 Victoria Melita SAXECOBURGH-GOTHA To Kirill Vladmirovich ROMANOV 08-Oct-05 Victoria sought permission for her first marriage but not her second
5 Beatrice Leopoldine Victoria SAXECOBURGH-GOTHA To Alfonso Maria Francisco Diego DE ORLÉANS Y DE BORBÓN 15-Jul-09 Beatrice may not have sought permission because her husband was Catholic and her heirs are also catholic
6 Helena Frances Augusta OF TECK To John Evelyn GIBBS 02-Sep-19 I cant find any record of the The Teck/Cambridge children having been given permission To marry
7 George OF TECK To Dorothy HASTINGS 10-Apr-23
8 Victoria Constance "Mary " OF TECK To Henry Hugh Arthur FitzRoy SOMERSET 14-Jun-23
9 George Wilhelm OF HANOVER To Sophie OF GREECE AND DENMARK 15-Dec-30 George's brothers Welf and Ernst both applied and received approval
10 Caroline Matilde Ludwige Eleanor Auguste Beatrice SAXECOBURGH-GOTHA To Friedrich Wolfgang Otto, ZU CASTELL-RÜDENHAUSEN 14-Dec-31 These next four marriages are the Chidren of Charles Eduard, Son of Leopold
11 Johann Leopold William Albert Ferdinand Victor SAXECOBURGH-GOTHA To Feodora Marie Alma Margarete VON DER HORST 14-Mar-32
12 Sibylla Calma Marie Alice Bathildis Feodora SAXECOBURGH-GOTHA, To Gustaf Adolf Oscar Frederik Arthur Edmund BERNADOTTE 19-Oct-32
13 Friedrich Josias SAXECOBURGH-GOTHA To Victoria Louise Frederica Caroline Matildhe OF SOLMS-BARUTH. 25-Jan-42
14 Christian Oskar OF HANOVER To Mireille DUTRY 23-Nov-63 See note at brother George above
15 Alexandra Irene Margaretha Elisabeth Bathildis OF HANOVER To Andreas ZU LEININGEN 05-Oct-81 These next 4 are Children of Ernst August of Hanover and Ortrud. Their eldest son requested permision to marry Chantal Hochuli but it would appear not Caroline of Monaco.
16 Marie Viktoria Luise Hertha Friederike OF HANOVER To Michael VON HOCHBERG 04-Jun-82
17 Ernst August Albert Otto Rupprecht Oskar Berthold Friedrich-Ferdinand Christian-Ludwig OF HANOVER To Caroline GRIMALDI 23-Jan-99
18 Heinrich Julius OF HANOVER To Thyra VON WESTERNHAGEN 30-Apr-99

Grateful if any one can confirm if any of these marriages actualy got approval
 
:previous:
- If a Royal is under 25, he/she must ask the Monarch consent to marry.
Victoria was under 25, but since she was the Sovereign, no permission was required.

- If a Royal marries a Catholic, he/she is automatically excluded from the Line of Succession.
Now, Victoria didn't marry a Catholic, so there was no issue. I do wonder what would have happened if she did though: the wording of the Act of settlement is somewhat confusing on this point. For instance, it could be argued that while those in the succession line could convert to Catholicism, the Sovereign actually could because he/she has to belong to the Church of England at the time of his/her accession to the Throne.

- The Parliament's consent could be sought only if the Monarch's consent wasn't received.
Since this was not a problem in Victoria's case, there was no need for the Parliament's permission at all. However, I'd imagine she did notify the Prime Minister beforehand and there were no objections.
 
#17 received approval from QEII.

Also, while it is a tradition in the Hanover family, descendents of princesses who married abroad do not need to request permission of the British monarch for their marriages. It has not been the tradition of the Coburgs to request permission.
 
Last edited:
A lot of these marriages don't need approval because they are descendents of a British princess who married into a foreign royal house.
 
Iluvbertie said:
A lot of these marriages don't need approval because they are descendents of a British princess who married into a foreign royal house.
Click to expand...

I am sorry but they do. For example lets take the Marriage of Ernst Augustus of Hanover to Princess Victoria Of Prussia on the 24 may 1913.

Victoria gained exemption from the Effects of the RMA by virtue of her grandmother Victoria, Princess Royal marrying Friedrich of Prussia.

However Ernst Augustus of Hanover did not. All his male line ancestors back to Ernst Augustus Duke of Cumberland. applied for permission to marry. They also applied for permission to marry and it was given.

When we look at the descendents of Ernst Augustus and Victoria of Prussia we find that their elsdest son Ernst August applied for permission for both his marriages Their Grandson also Ernst August also applied for permission for his marriages to Chantal Hochuli and Caroline Grimaldi

The Fourth Son Welf Heinrich applied for permission.

Also the eldest daughter Friederika applied for permissionto marry Paul of the Hellenes.

There are other examples Like Princees Elizabeth marrying Prince Philip. Prince Philip has Exemption by virtue of Great grand mother Princess Alice marrying Ludwig of Hesse and by Rhine. However Princess elizabeth did not so therefore all her descendents lost their exemption.

It is clear (to me ) that it is not sufficient to say that beacuse you are descendended from a princess who married into a foreign house you are exempt from the effects of the RMA. If said descendent then marries someone who is subject to the RMA then their descendents once again are subject to the rules of the RMA.
 
Last edited:
David Lewis said:
I am sorry but they do. For example lets take the Marriage of Ernst Augustus of Hanover to Princess Victoria Of Prussia on the 24 may 1913.

Victoria gained exemption from the Effects of the RMA by virtue of her grandmother Victoria, Princess Royal marrying Friedrich of Prussia.

However Ernst Augustus of Hanover did not. All his male line ancestors back to Ernst Augustus Duke of Cumberland. applied for permission to marry. They also applied for permission to marry and it was given.

When we look at the descendents of Ernst Augustus and Victoria of Prussia we find that their elsdest son Ernst August applied for permission for both his marriages Their Grandson also Ernst August also applied for permission for his marriages to Chantal Hochuli and Caroline Grimaldi

The Fourth Son Welf Heinrich applied for permission.

Also the eldest daughter Friederika applied for permissionto marry Paul of the Hellenes.

There are other examples Like Princees Elizabeth marrying Prince Philip. Prince Philip has Exemption by virtue of Great grand mother Princess Alice marrying Ludwig of Hesse and by Rhine. However Princess elizabeth did not so therefore all her descendents lost their exemption.

It is clear (to me ) that it is not sufficient to say that beacuse you are descendended from a princess who married into a foreign house you are exempt from the effects of the RMA. If said descendent then marries someone who is subject to the RMA then their descendents once again are subject to the rules of the RMA.
Click to expand...


As the exemption is specified in the RMA they are exempt from the need to seek permission under the RMA because they are exempt from seeking permission under the provisions of the RMA. The RMA did not say that if such a descendent married back into the BRF the exemption would cease to exist - and they would have realised that possibility.

They have voluntarily chosen to continue to do so but they do not need to do so.

This will all be mute in a short while anyway with the changes that the RMA will only apply to the first six in the line of succession anyway - which means for Beatrice and Eugenie they may or may not need to seek permission depending on when William and Kate start having children and how many they have.
 
BTW, what is the current status on the repeal of the RMA 1772 and the introduction of absolute primogeniture? I heard about this a little while ago but I have not heard whether or not any Acts have been put before parliament yet.
 
The last I heard was that there are a group of people from across the 16 involved nations meeting to work out the terminology so that it mets the requirements of all of the countries.

It is coming but I am not holding my breath - particularly if Kate has a son first.
 
I don't understand why the BRF still follows such a thing in order to marry, certainly the royal family's views on marriage changed since the RMA was created.
 
:previous:

Not tradition - that is something that is done because its always been done enshrined in action rather than written down.

The Monarch's approval for marriage is the law. The law made by government, not by the monarchy. So changes must come from government. I believe that this is due to be changed along with the expected primgeniture legislation
 
Why can royals marry commoners now?

And still be allowed their title?
 
Why not. They would have no one to marry, if not. And their gene pool would be very compromised.
 
:previous:

And indeed, several British Royals did marry commoners. Four of Henry VIII's wives (Anne Boleyn, Jane Seymour, Katherine Howard and Katherine Parr) were commoners, as were Anne Hyde (wife of the future James II and mother of Mary II and Queen Anne), Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon, Lady Diana Spencer, Camilla Parker Bowles and Catherine Middleton. And those are the ladies who married Heirs (Presumptive or Apparent).

In regards to other countries where morganatic marriages existed and laws stipulated only royal-royal or royal-noble marriages were equal, then the answer is quite simple: laws were changed.
 
Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon and Lady Diana Spencer, although commoners under British law, are from illustrious families.

I'm not a huge Diana fan but there is no denying the Spencer-Churchills can be ranked with many of the royal, ducal and princely families on the continent in terms of wealth and prestige
 
:previous:

Anne Boleyn and Katherine Howard's families were every bit as illustrious as Diana's (arguably, more so). I am a Diana fan but she was hardly the most illustrious commoner to marry into the British Royal Family.

Although Camilla Shand, Anne Hyde and Catherine Parr had no courtesy styles, they came from families as noble and/or aristocratic as Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon's.
 
Camilla's family is as noble/aristocratic as the Bowes-Lyon? I didn't know that.
 
Last edited:
Wasn't the first commoner to marry into the English royal family Elizabeth Woodville?
Also to answer the question, laws had to be changed because there are less royals now then there was a century ago. You either let them marry commoners or have your house become extinct.
 
XeniaCasaraghi said:
Wasn't the first commoner to marry into the English royal family Elizabeth Woodville?
Click to expand...
Elizabeth Woodville was the very first commoner to marry an English Monarch. However, she was most definitely not the first to marry into the English Royal Family; before her, several English Princes and Princesses marrying commoners, including John of Gaunt who married Katherine Swynford.
 
Remember in the United Kingdom, Prince Harry and Princess Anne are commoners. This definition is different from most of the continent

So the question of "Why can royals marry commoners now" has to be taken in context.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Marengo
The Act of Settlement 1701 and the Line of Succession 2, Sep 2022-
Replies
1
Views
319
Tatiana Maria
T
Kenneth Michael
Creating A Fictional Branch of the Spencer Family for a TV Character
Replies
8
Views
1K
Toledo
Toledo
M
Family Bylaws Concerning the House Law of the House of Luxembourg-Nassau
Replies
1
Views
2K
Tatiana Maria
T
Blog Real
Other Royal Pantheons of Spain (of the monarchs of Asturias, Leon, Castile, Aragon, Navarre and Others)
Replies
4
Views
887
An Ard Ri
An Ard Ri
T
Constitutional and Dynastic Matters in the Norwegian Monarchy
2 3
Replies
69
Views
9K
Tatiana Maria
T

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom