AHC: Royals continue to marry royals

What would it take to ensure that the tradition of royals marrying royals from foreign royal houses continues to this day?
For example, instead of Prince Harry marrying Meghan Markle, he becomes engaged to a Princess of Spain or the Netherlands or Sweden, etc.
This type of marriage seemed to be common until just after WWII, Elizabeth and Philip (of Greece) are the last royal couple in Britain I can think of who married between the ruling royal houses of Europe (Windsor and Glücksburg). Many of the royal marriages in Britain in the second half of the 20th century were between those from the actual royal family with members of the British aristocracy or military, but how can we keep these marriages between the major royal houses of Europe, not just within the upper class of one country.
IMO, it would require saving the majority of the European monarchies from falling (possibly preventing the rise of communism), which would probably require a pre-1900 POD.
 
Royal intermarriages probably would not have similar political consequences as it did in the past. Alliances would not be made, politics would not change. Perhaps these matches could have some cultural influence but not anything more.

Maybe it could also lead to more a anti-aristocracy mood? Where the aristocrats could be seen as seperate from the country/state/nation? More fire for the agitators on the left?
 
What would it take to ensure that the tradition of royals marrying royals from foreign royal houses continues to this day?
For example, instead of Prince Harry marrying Meghan Markle, he becomes engaged to a Princess of Spain or the Netherlands or Sweden, etc.
This type of marriage seemed to be common until just after WWII, Elizabeth and Philip (of Greece) are the last royal couple in Britain I can think of who married between the ruling royal houses of Europe (Windsor and Glücksburg). Many of the royal marriages in Britain in the second half of the 20th century were between those from the actual royal family with members of the British aristocracy or military, but how can we keep these marriages between the major royal houses of Europe, not just within the upper class of one country.
IMO, it would require saving the majority of the European monarchies from falling (possibly preventing the rise of communism), which would probably require a pre-1900 POD.
Well you need to Butterfly away the American and the French revolution, or at less make the American Revolution install a Monarchy and the the French one be less murderous with their Nobility.
This both actions don´t automatically made the Royal houses superfluous, but give you a real working alternative. Plus in the case of the French Revolution, it´s killed so much of the noble house of France, Italy, Spain, and evey one that could they put his hand one, that two generations later, all the royal house were Family, there is reason that the WWI was a family Feud, situation that make even more complex the royal marriages, and the incest problems associated
 
I think there was a growing assumption by the early 20th century that a romantic element was needed in order to ensure the survival of marriage especially given divorce was considered the ultimate disgrace.
A number of late 19th and early 20th Century royal or equal marriages were based on affection or familiarity (due to family ties etc).
Much of course dependend on the view of the reigning monarch of the day - Victoria was a romantic so was less concerned about the status or her children's spouses - her daughter's marraige to a British peer was the first legal non-royal marriage in Britain for decades but it didn't open the floodgates.
War changed attitudes - George V was well aware that toleration for germanic marriages after WWI would be non existant - all but one of his children married British aristocrats on the Duke of Kent married a Princess by birth (Marina of Greece) and that was hardly an arranged one.
It is largely the surviving monarchies that have adapted - the heirs of every surviving throne have all married unequally.
The dynasties that have clung to the rules are the ones that have really struggled to maintain a decent, solid line of descent from their deposed predecessors.
The problem wasn't so much the kinship but how the relationship was no longer seen as a guarantee of peace - Royal Marriages were supposed at least in theory to improve relations - that theory was rather blown apart by WWI (also the collapse of major monarchies in Russia Austria and Germany reduced the pool somewhat) - the Balkan monarchies continued to intermarry between the wars though.
In fact the relations at the outbreak of WWI were not within the forbidden bounds by most churches to regard a match as incestuous.

Elizabeth II's marriage is of course a Royal one - but more was made of Philip's dumping of his Greek and Danish titles and British nationality etc.
After that you have others Juan Carlos of Spain, Constantine of Greece etc in the 60s

If those were the norm rather than the exception not much really would change - even when Alfonso of Spain married his British bride - the treaty between Britain and Spain for the marriage was clear that it was a personal family matter not an alliance between the two nations of a political nature.
 
Given that modern royal marriages often involve a very attractive non-royal spouse, I'd say that this would lower interest substantially.
 

Md139115

Banned
You watch, Prince George and Princess Estelle will wind up falling in love with each other, and we’ll be in the awkward position of a Anglo-Swedish personal union.
 
You watch, Prince George and Princess Estelle will wind up falling in love with each other, and we’ll be in the awkward position of a Anglo-Swedish personal union.
Yeah but that marriage will be the one more close to a real Fairy tale you could get, at least will be better than ]Prince George Grandparents "fairy tale" marriage

Edit: The marriage between Princess Charlotte and Princes Oscar could also be a close runner and a good alliance proposal. Maybe I must stop playing CK2?
 
The interesting thing about this is proximity - in the late 19th century many of the royal marriages were created in part due to the close family relationship of the Danish Royal Family - all those annual holidays in Denmark that linked Britain, Denmark, Greece and Russia etc - nowadays the closeness has faded so there is little reason for Prince A to meet and fall for Princess B.
 
The interesting thing about this is proximity - in the late 19th century many of the royal marriages were created in part due to the close family relationship of the Danish Royal Family - all those annual holidays in Denmark that linked Britain, Denmark, Greece and Russia etc - nowadays the closeness has faded so there is little reason for Prince A to meet and fall for Princess B.

IDK, as late as the 1920s/1930s, Queen Wilhelmina was still trying to arrange such visits for the Dutch royal family in order to marry Princess (later Queen) Juliana to a royal spouse. Julz was particularly taken with Prince Petros (Black Pete) of Greece, apparently, but for some reason the marriage talks fell through and Wilhelmina suspected the Swedes who had just married into neighboring Belgium, were behind it. Many of the other prospective matches for Julz were Germans, and because of the state of affairs in Germany at the time, the Dutch had to arrange these meetings in Austria or somewhere neutral (like England, where she was invited to be bridesmaid at someone's wedding where one of her prospective spouses were going to be - the Dutch wrote the suitor off as only interested in fast cars and still faster women, despite he and Julz liking each other). However, some of the chaps stood her up (ICR who it was, but he was invited to go hunting with the Dutch, and they waited for him for a week to turn up, only to find out afterwards that he was busy getting married to someone "unsuitable" which was why he didn't turn up).

I think this may have been the reason that Juliana just gave it up as a lost cause for her own daughters. But I saw a TL on another site where instead of marrying his OTL wife, the 2e duke of Kent (son of the youngest son of George V and Marina of Greece), wed Beatrix of the Netherlands instead. And if The Crown's historical accuracy is anything to go by, there were foreign matches for Princess Margaret with either a younger son of Hesse-Kassel (Philip of Greece's one-time brother-in-law's brother) and a prince of Hannover. And apparently there was a Romanov (albeit from a morganatic side-line) considered for Prince Charles.
 
You watch, Prince George and Princess Estelle will wind up falling in love with each other, and we’ll be in the awkward position of a Anglo-Swedish personal union.

Fun idea but at least Estelle should renounce her right to Swedish throne if she marries someone who will ascend to throne of another nation. Well, then there would be king Oscar III. Hopefully he has on this implausible scenario learn charm people instead being almost just one-faced kid. Good match could be prince Vincent of Denmark.

But seriously when almost all royal families are relatives of each others there is quiet big danger for some inbreeding issues. That hemophilia case was bad enough on recent history.
 
Your biggest problem here is that you're using Harry as an example. And the Brits were NEVER hung up on that issue. Sure, they'd marry a foreign royal if it seemed like a good idea, but it was nothing like a rule. Henry Viii married 2 princesses out of 6 wives, I think.
What would it take to ensure that the tradition of royals marrying royals from foreign royal houses continues to this day?
For example, instead of Prince Harry marrying Meghan Markle, he becomes engaged to a Princess of Spain or the Netherlands or Sweden, etc.
This type of marriage seemed to be common until just after WWII, Elizabeth and Philip (of Greece) are the last royal couple in Britain I can think of who married between the ruling royal houses of Europe (Windsor and Glücksburg). Many of the royal marriages in Britain in the second half of the 20th century were between those from the actual royal family with members of the British aristocracy or military, but how can we keep these marriages between the major royal houses of Europe, not just within the upper class of one country.
IMO, it would require saving the majority of the European monarchies from falling (possibly preventing the rise of communism), which would probably require a pre-1900 POD.
 
Your biggest problem here is that you're using Harry as an example. And the Brits were NEVER hung up on that issue. Sure, they'd marry a foreign royal if it seemed like a good idea, but it was nothing like a rule. Henry Viii married 2 princesses out of 6 wives, I think.

I have no issue with Harry and Meghan. However I did feel when I first heard of it, that Granny Liz should do the same to Ms Markle as how Victoria treated George of Cambridge's wedding to Sarah Louise Fairbrother. She knows the marriage is there but the woman's still just Mrs. FitzGeorge/Ms. Fairbrother. However the public would regard it as a Diana 2.0 scenario probably
 
Yes there was considerable shock when Princess Louise married the Marquess of Lorne as he was most definitely a commoner (it was however very popular match in Britain) - Victoria was shall we say more keen to keep her younger daughter's at home and believed their status as British princesses outstripped foreign royalty anyway - hence her willingness for matches with the Battenburgs, the Tecks etc.
Even in the 1880's and 90s Princess May of Teck was considered not suitable for foreign royals due to her father's rank.
Of course the idea of equal marriage was really a foreign import brought over with the house of Hannover - up to that point we had a number of "common" queen consorts or royal brides - Anne Hyde, three of Henry VIII's wives, Edward IV's wife etc... to mention a few.
 
Even in the 1880's and 90s Princess May of Teck was considered not suitable for foreign royals due to her father's rank..

Apparently even Princess Margaret looked down her nose at Grandma Mary as a child, since she [Margaret] "was a 'royal highness', Mary was only a 'serene highness'"
 
Top