Discussion:
+Carl Bernadotte 1911-2003
(too old to reply)
Lethal Injectn
2003-06-27 18:19:01 UTC
Permalink
Prince Carl Bernadotte has past away at the age of 92.
He was the uncle of the current King of the Belgians and the King of Norway
(their mothers were his sisters). He was the son of Prince Prince Carl of
the Sweden & Princess Ingeborg of Denmark.

The Prince lost his title and succession rights to the Swedish throne years
ago when he married his first wife, who was a commoner. Subsequently, his
brother-in-law, King Leopold, created him Prince Bernadotte.

He is survived by his wife, Princess Kirsten.

Regards,

Sean.~ >>

Sean,
Thanks for the article. It raised something I've always been fascinated by:
laws against morganatic marriages. So, perhaps you (or someone else) can answer
some questions for me:

1- I'm presuming Sweden had a law against morganatic marriages at the time of
Carl Bernadotte's marriage since he lost his title and succession rights. Does
that law still exist today and, if so, is it in the same form or has it been
modified at all?

2- What other countries, if any, still have laws against morganatic marriages?

3- Was Carl Bernadotte the last royal this century to lose his title and
succession rights due to a law prohibiting a morganatic marriage? (I've
phrased the question that way to avoid including anyone who voluntarily
abdicated their title due to an seemingly inappropriate marriage)
SEAN
2003-06-28 03:59:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lethal Injectn
Prince Carl Bernadotte has past away at the age of 92.
He was the uncle of the current King of the Belgians and the King of Norway
(their mothers were his sisters). He was the son of Prince Prince Carl of
the Sweden & Princess Ingeborg of Denmark.
The Prince lost his title and succession rights to the Swedish throne years
ago when he married his first wife, who was a commoner. Subsequently, his
brother-in-law, King Leopold, created him Prince Bernadotte.
He is survived by his wife, Princess Kirsten.
Regards,
Sean.~ >>
Sean,
laws against morganatic marriages. So, perhaps you (or someone else) can answer
1- I'm presuming Sweden had a law against morganatic marriages at the time of
Carl Bernadotte's marriage since he lost his title and succession rights.
Does
Post by Lethal Injectn
that law still exist today and, if so, is it in the same form or has it been
modified at all?
Hello, Salome (may I call you that?)

Sweden does *not* have a law against morganatic marriags. It did not have
one at the time of Carl Bernadotte's marriage either. Marriages of members
of the royal family, however, have to be approved by the King and council.
The King himself can may marry who he likes. Carl and some of his other
male relatives did not lose their titles per se. Rather, they renounced them
due to their marriages to commoners. This was expected of them.

Notably, an officially morganatic marriage does not necessarily exclude one
from the succession. Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria is a good example
of this. It only excludes the spouse and children from titles and
succession rights.
Post by Lethal Injectn
2- What other countries, if any, still have laws against morganatic marriages?
The legal concept of morganatic marriage is not applicable in any country
today. It is up to the head of the house to decide. Spain used to have a
provision stipulating that the heir to the throne had to marry a Princess
(or something along those lines ). However, there is some question as to
whether that is still binding (some will claim that the consitution still
states the heir does have to marry a royal, but in reality it states no such
thing). Howver, I think that the marriage of the heir may still may require
the approval of the Cortes.

Some of the German houses also still adhere to the concept of equal marriage
(most notably Wurrtemburg).
Post by Lethal Injectn
3- Was Carl Bernadotte the last royal this century to lose his title and
succession rights due to a law prohibiting a morganatic marriage? (I've
phrased the question that way to avoid including anyone who voluntarily
abdicated their title due to an seemingly inappropriate marriage)
Again, there was no law per se. It was just understood that members of the
royal family would make equal mariages. If not , they would have to give up
their succession rights. Carl wasn't the last one. IIRC, Prince Jean of
Luxembourg was (brother of Grand Duke Henri). He married Helene Suzanne
Vestur in 1987.

Regards,

Sean.~
julian
2003-06-28 20:11:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lethal Injectn
Post by Lethal Injectn
Prince Carl Bernadotte has past away at the age of 92.
He was the uncle of the current King of the Belgians and the King of
Norway
Post by Lethal Injectn
(their mothers were his sisters). He was the son of Prince Prince Carl of
the Sweden & Princess Ingeborg of Denmark.
The Prince lost his title and succession rights to the Swedish throne
years
Post by Lethal Injectn
ago when he married his first wife, who was a commoner. Subsequently, his
brother-in-law, King Leopold, created him Prince Bernadotte.
He is survived by his wife, Princess Kirsten.
Regards,
Sean.~ >>
Sean,
Thanks for the article. It raised something I've always been fascinated
laws against morganatic marriages. So, perhaps you (or someone else) can
answer
Post by Lethal Injectn
1- I'm presuming Sweden had a law against morganatic marriages at the time
of
Post by Lethal Injectn
Carl Bernadotte's marriage since he lost his title and succession rights.
Does
Post by Lethal Injectn
that law still exist today and, if so, is it in the same form or has it
been
Post by Lethal Injectn
modified at all?
Hello, Salome (may I call you that?)
Sweden does *not* have a law against morganatic marriags. It did not have
one at the time of Carl Bernadotte's marriage either. Marriages of members
of the royal family, however, have to be approved by the King and council.
The King himself can may marry who he likes. Carl and some of his other
male relatives did not lose their titles per se. Rather, they renounced them
due to their marriages to commoners. This was expected of them.
Notably, an officially morganatic marriage does not necessarily exclude one
from the succession. Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria is a good example
of this. It only excludes the spouse and children from titles and
succession rights.
Post by Lethal Injectn
2- What other countries, if any, still have laws against morganatic
marriages?
The legal concept of morganatic marriage is not applicable in any country
today. It is up to the head of the house to decide. Spain used to have a
provision stipulating that the heir to the throne had to marry a Princess
(or something along those lines ). However, there is some question as to
whether that is still binding (some will claim that the consitution still
states the heir does have to marry a royal, but in reality it states no such
thing). Howver, I think that the marriage of the heir may still may require
the approval of the Cortes.
=========================================
Post by Lethal Injectn
Some of the German houses also still adhere to the concept of equal marriage
(most notably Wurrtemburg).
Post by Lethal Injectn
3- Was Carl Bernadotte the last royal this century to lose his title and
succession rights due to a law prohibiting a morganatic marriage? (I've
phrased the question that way to avoid including anyone who voluntarily
abdicated their title due to an seemingly inappropriate marriage)
Again, there was no law per se. It was just understood that members of the
royal family would make equal mariages. If not , they would have to give up
their succession rights. Carl wasn't the last one. IIRC, Prince Jean of
Luxembourg was (brother of Grand Duke Henri). He married Helene Suzanne
Vestur in 1987.
Regards,
Sean.~
=====================================================

I think I've read that the Vestur marriage is over now, however the
present Grand Duke did allow her and the children from that marriage
to be styled as Counts of Nassau (without succession rights).
Lethal Injectn
2003-06-30 07:54:21 UTC
Permalink
From: "SEAN" ***@here.com

(snipped to points being responded to)
Post by SEAN
Hello, Salome (may I call you that?) >>
About bloody time ;) In all seriousness, I'd be very glad if you did. This SN
is an inside joke with one of my best friends but it's becoming a nuisance.
Unfortunately, since everyone here knows me as this, I'm hesitant to come up
with something new.
Post by SEAN
Sweden does *not* have a law against morganatic marriags. It did not have one
at the time of Carl Bernadotte's marriage either. Marriages of members of the
royal family, however, have to be approved by the King and council. The King
himself can may marry who he likes. Carl and some of his other
male relatives did not lose their titles per se. Rather, they renounced them
due to their marriages to commoners. This was expected of them. >>

Hmmm.... I'm struggling with this. Something... and I can't decide what....
doesn't seem to click for me. If Carl's brother elevated him to a princely
title after his marriage, he obviously didn't object so much that he would
withhold his (obviously dispositive) vote in the council. So why wouldn't the
council have approved the marriage in the first place, commoner or otherwise?

As a corollary, if the marriage meets with the King's approval, even if the
morganatic, then why would they renounce their title? It seems to completly
negate the whole point for the council in the first place if they never get a
chance to rule on any geniune issues because the person is expected to renounce
ahead of time. If the council is to be real, they have to have the case before
them, and that means no rubber stamping and no prior renunciations only to get
the title later. Or am I being wholly naive?
Post by SEAN
Carl wasn't the last one. IIRC, Prince Jean of
Luxembourg was (brother of Grand Duke Henri). He married Helene Suzanne Vestur
in 1987. >>

Do you, perchance, know what happened to him in terms of his title? Did Grand
Duke Henri provide him with any honorific title or financial support?

BTW, when Prince Carl was re-titled as a Prince, did he still receive any money
from the Swedish King (ie, from his Privy Purse)?

Lastly, I know this is a very stupid question but you said his b-i-l, King
Leopold created him Prince Bernadotte. So a Swedish Prince became a Belgian
Prince???? How exactly did the Belgian subjects take to that? Also, how did
they react to the fact that some financial assistance surely had to come from
Belgian and, thus, from the taxpayers in some small measure?
SEAN
2003-06-28 07:54:11 UTC
Permalink
"PK" <***@e-garfield.com> wrote in message news:***@posting.google.com...

snipt ot point.
On another note, in a recent photograph of Carl, his Wife remains
quite lovely.
Beautiful teeth!!
That is an interesting observation.

Sean.~
Lethal Injectn
2003-06-30 23:38:36 UTC
Permalink
From: "SEAN" ***@here.com

(snipped to various points being responded to)
Post by Lethal Injectn
If Carl's brother elevated him to a
princely title after his marriage, he obviously didn't object so much that he
would withhold his (obviously dispositive) vote in the council. So why
wouldn't
the council have approved the marriage in the first place, commoner or
otherwise?>>
It wasn't his brother that 'elevated' him.>>
Thank you for the correction. I got myself mixed up because I was thinking
about your comment that the King and council had to approve of the marriage and
that the King did approve of it on a personal level. I somehow ended up
assuming that the King was Carl's brother.
Carl didn't have any brothers. He
was an only son. Rather, his brother-in-law, Leopold III, King of the
Belgians, granted him the title of Prince. Carl's sister Astrid (born Princess
of Sweden) was married to Leopold before her death in the 1930s. The title was
not a royal title, but a noble one (the title of Prince is recognized as a
title of nobility in Belgium). In short, his brother-in-law
made him a member of the Belgium nobility.Carl's children were to be titled
Count/Countess Bernadotte. There was (is) one daughter, Madelaine. >>

I didn't know any of this, especially the fact that the title "Prince" is
considered to be merely a title of nobility in Belgium.
Post by Lethal Injectn
As a corollary, if the marriage meets with the King's approval, even if
the morganatic, then why would they renounce their title?>>>>
IIRC, I don't *think* he even sought approval of King and council.>>
I find that a bit baffling. IIRC, you'd said earlier that the King would have
probably have approved of the marriage or, at least, that he approved it
personally and unofficially. Why then would Carl not have tried to seek
council approval and maintain his title and position?
No. He wasn't re-titled. In Sweden only the King receives money from the
civil list.>>

Can you elaborate a bit? Do you mean only the immediate RF receives money from
the civil list or only the King, who may then parcel it out as he sees fit?
SEAN
2003-07-01 00:07:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lethal Injectn
(snipped to various points being responded to)
Post by Lethal Injectn
If Carl's brother elevated him to a
princely title after his marriage, he obviously didn't object so much that he
would withhold his (obviously dispositive) vote in the council. So why
wouldn't
the council have approved the marriage in the first place, commoner or
otherwise?>>
It wasn't his brother that 'elevated' him.>>
Thank you for the correction. I got myself mixed up because I was thinking
about your comment that the King and council had to approve of the marriage and
that the King did approve of it on a personal level. I somehow ended up
assuming that the King was Carl's brother.
Carl didn't have any brothers. He
was an only son. Rather, his brother-in-law, Leopold III, King of the
Belgians, granted him the title of Prince. Carl's sister Astrid (born Princess
of Sweden) was married to Leopold before her death in the 1930s. The title was
not a royal title, but a noble one (the title of Prince is recognized as a
title of nobility in Belgium). In short, his brother-in-law
made him a member of the Belgium nobility.Carl's children were to be titled
Count/Countess Bernadotte. There was (is) one daughter, Madelaine. >>
I didn't know any of this, especially the fact that the title "Prince" is
considered to be merely a title of nobility in Belgium.
It can be a Royal title and a noble title. There are old princely houses in
Belgium (e.g. Ligne and Croy ). Also, I should have pointed out that that
title granted to him was Prince Bernadotte, however, he was generally
referred to as Prince Carl Bernadotte.
Post by Lethal Injectn
Post by Lethal Injectn
As a corollary, if the marriage meets with the King's approval, even if
the morganatic, then why would they renounce their title?>>>>
IIRC, I don't *think* he even sought approval of King and council.>>
I find that a bit baffling. IIRC, you'd said earlier that the King would have
probably have approved of the marriage or, at least, that he approved it
personally and unofficially.
Um, I didn't say that. I wrote:

"Sweden does *not* have a law against morganatic marriags. It did not have
one at the time of Carl Bernadotte's marriage either. Marriages of members
of the royal family, however, have to be approved by the King and council.
The King himself can may marry who he likes. Carl and some of his other
male relatives did not lose their titles per se. Rather, they renounced them
due to their marriages to commoners. This was expected of them."


Why then would Carl not have tried to seek
Post by Lethal Injectn
council approval and maintain his title and position?
Like I said, As far as I recall he did not, but I could be wrong. He most
likely knew that he was going to be rejected.
At the time it was expected for members of the RF to marry equally. This was
the 1930s and Gustav V was still King. He probably would not have given
approval.

Also, you have to keep in mind that he was only a nephew of the King. Gustav
V even made two of his grandson's (the present King's uncles) renounce their
titles.

In Denmark today it is the practice for lesser members of the RF to give up
their royal titles in exchange for the lesser title of Count of Rosenberg
upon marrying commoners. It helps controls the size of the RF.
Post by Lethal Injectn
No. He wasn't re-titled. In Sweden only the King receives money from the
civil list.>>
Can you elaborate a bit? Do you mean only the immediate RF receives money from
the civil list or only the King, who may then parcel it out as he sees
fit?>

I'm pretty sure that it is only the King. IIRC, there is a separate
allocation for travel expenses, etc. I have figures somewhere and I will be
happy to look them up for you when I have more time.
SEAN
2003-07-01 00:48:42 UTC
Permalink
snip to point.
You're right, again. It must have been a comment I read last week back on
ATR
after you first posted on the situation. I am pretty sure I read
(somewhere,
by someone) that the king was approving of it. I was sure that you had
written
it because I am reluctant to ever enter into discussions on ATR. Forgive
the
mix-up
Don't worry about it!!

but last week was a complete blur of insomnia, massive insanity, family
visits, and preparation for a small cocktail party.
Me too. Well, less the family visits and the cocktail party (but I could
sure do with one. The cocktail party bit, anyway).
Andy.3rd
2003-07-01 01:17:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by SEAN
Me too. Well, less the family visits and the cocktail party (but I could
sure do with one. The cocktail party bit, anyway).
Can I just have the cocktails and skip the party? :)



His Illustrious and Most Serene Jadedness, Andy, RSM
SEAN
2003-07-01 01:33:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andy.3rd
Post by SEAN
Me too. Well, less the family visits and the cocktail party (but I could
sure do with one. The cocktail party bit, anyway).
Can I just have the cocktails and skip the party? :)
Well, I was trying to be polite <g>
Post by Andy.3rd
His Illustrious and Most Serene Jadedness, Andy, RSM
Lethal Injectn
2003-07-01 03:18:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by SEAN
Post by Andy.3rd
Can I just have the cocktails and skip the party? :)
Well, I was trying to be polite <g>
--- SWAT -----
<g>
Andy.3rd
2003-07-01 03:26:04 UTC
Permalink
Skip the party and miss Kafka??? Forget about being around me; would you
really
have survived life without meeting HRH? Be careful how you answer lest I swat
you..... ;-)
Besides, I serve very tasty hors d'oevres. <sniff>
Between your hors d'ovres and Kafka I'll probably wind up missing Sassy- That's
the problem! ;)


His Illustrious and Most Serene Jadedness, Andy, RSM
Lethal Injectn
2003-07-01 03:53:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andy.3rd
Skip the party and miss Kafka??? Forget about being around me; would you
really have survived life without meeting HRH? Be careful how you answer lest I
swat you..... ;-)
Post by Andy.3rd
Besides, I serve very tasty hors d'oevres. <sniff> >>
Between your hors d'ovres and Kafka I'll probably wind up missing Sassy- That's
the problem! ;)>>


Good point [and nice save..... ;) ]

Okay, a compromise: you stay for a short while, and long enough to wait for
Kafka to be let out of his area and duly worshipped, and then I send you home
with a ton of stuff that Sassy would adore for hand-feeding. I'll even try to
take you and Biron into consideration when deciding between Saumon Fumé and
Chambertin.... (ducking and fleeing)
Andy.3rd
2003-07-01 04:13:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lethal Injectn
Okay, a compromise: you stay for a short while, and long enough to wait for
Kafka to be let out of his area and duly worshipped, and then I send you home
with a ton of stuff that Sassy would adore for hand-feeding. I'll even try to
take you and Biron into consideration when deciding between Saumon Fumé and
Chambertin.... (ducking and fleeing)
LOL!!!!!!!

Deal!.. btw- how does Kafka feel about pads being rubbed? (IOW is it an
acceptable form of worship)? Sassy adores it.



His Illustrious and Most Serene Jadedness, Andy, RSM

Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...