Royal succession

Blue2Jo here. With a royal birth in the news, I thought I'd give a brief run down of the situation in late 1817 when there was a royal succession crisis because of a birth that did not go well.

I write my Company of Rogues books along a time line that started in 1814, and though I've gone slowly I've arrived at the great tragedy of the death of Princess Charlotte in childbirth in November 1817. It can hardly be ignored, so it forms part of the plot of next year's book, The Viscount Needs a Wife. Charlotte

People sometimes think that death in childbirth was common in the past. It was more common than now, but not so much so that the death of a young, healthy woman and her baby was taken in stride. The nation was plunged into a genuine and almost manic mourning that continued well into the next year. Court mourning plunged the aristocracy into black, and nearly everyone wore sober colors, black arm bands and similar signs of grief. There were many ramifications, but I'll save those for another post.

In addition to a human tragedy, Charlotte's death created a succession crisis.


George III and Queen Charlotte did not shirk their duty. They had fifteen children, and in 1817 twelve were still alive. However, Charlotte was the only legitimate grandchild. The king's offspring were not young. He'd been on the throne for nearly fifty years, and the youngest surviving child was Sophia, born in 1777. At forty, she wasn't a great hope for the next generation, and in any case she wasn't married.

There were seven sons, however. That should solve it. Hum. Let's consider them.

Char1. George, the Prince Regent. He had been separated from his wife Caroline, Charlotte's mother, from not long after the wedding. Not able to marry.

2. Frederick, Duke of York had a career in the army. He had dutifully married in 1791, to Princess Frederica Charlotte of Prussia but there were no children. This union was also unhappy and they lived apart. Not able to marry.

(Part of the reason for these failed marriages and the succession crisis in general was the Royal Marriage Act of 1772 that controlled who a royal person could marry. (Full details here.) George III insisted on this to prevent his sons from making unsuitable marriages, but the result was that they mostly chose not to. Basically, only Protestant princesses were likely to meet with the king's approval.)

The picture is of Charlotte with her two oldest sons.

3.William, Duke of Clarence served in the navy in his younger years. He simply settled for a mistress, and lived with an actress, Mrs. Jordan, for twenty years having ten children — the Fitzclarences. All illegitimate, however, so not in the line of succession.

4. Edward, Duke of Kent. Army. He, too had a long-term mistress, Madame de St. Laurent. They had no children together.

5. Ernest, Duke of Cumberland. Army. He actually fell in love and married in 1815, though it was a messy affair as Duchess Frederica of Mecklenburg-Strelitz was married when they fell in love. Her husband's death seemed somewhat convenient and in addition the queen didn't like Frederica. All the same they did marry, but reproduction didn't go well, and by November 1817 they had no children.

6 Augustus, Duke of Sussex. He was the family rebel, later supporting what we might call socialist causes. His rebellious streak led to a marriage in 1793 that contravened the Royal Marriage Act. They had children, but the marriage was annulled because of the Act, so the children were not in line to the throne. He separated from his unauthorized wife in 1801, but didn't marry until 1831, after his first wife died. So presumably he considered himself married and was not willing to marry suitably in 1817, even if his nature would allow it.

7.Adolphus, Duke of Cambridge. Army. He had no particular relationships.

I've colored red the three able and willing to marry, and they did set to it, trawling German princesses for likely candidates. The Duke of Cambridge was married in June, to Princess Augusta of Hesse-Kassel. Kent and Clarence had a double wedding ceremony on the 11th of July 1818. Kent married Victoria, the Dowager Princess of Leiningen, and Clarence married Adelaide of Saxe-Meiningen. 

The Duke of Cambridge had three children.

Clarence's marriage was happy, but his wife had a number of miscarriage and no surviving children.

Kent sired only one legitimate child before dying in 1820, but as he was the oldest of the three, his daughter eventually became Queen Victoria.

The Crisis

But for a while after the death of Charlotte into late 1817 the uncertaintly over the succession shook the country. The king was a mad old man expected to die at any moment. The Regent was not a well man and could also die. In addition, his extreme grief over his daughter made people begin to wonder if he might go mad, too. There were brothers to succeed him, but all middle aged men. What if none of them managed to sire a child who survived?

There were a number of foreign Protestants with a claim, but it was messy, and the British people wouldn't welcome a foreigner again. The Hanoverians who'd arrived with George I hadn't been a completely happy experience.  In addition, the country was already in turmoil because of the depressed economy and social unrest which at times approached rebellion and revolution. (This forms part of my April book, Too Dangerous for a Lady.) Many feared that a series of royal deaths could tear Britain apart. Tdyalmod

To add to that, there were still Stuart claimants — Jacobites. Might they leap into uncertainty to create a civil war? The old enemy France would be happy to exploit that.

A stressful time, but that makes it an interesting background for a book. And of course, by 1819 there were a number of Hanoverian heirs, born in Britain and ready to serve.

This whole situation is additionally interesting to me because my Malloren series begins shortly after George III was crowned, and includes mentions of the births of his older children. It feels as if I've been following the family. No one then had any premonition of the troubles to come. In fact, a young king, born in Britain and speaking English as his native tongue seemed a bright hope for the future.

Jo

80 thoughts on “Royal succession”

  1. I was looking at the children of George III yesterday, after seeing a portrait of them. I discovered that, because Adolphus, Duke of Cambridge was the grandfather of Mary of Teck, Queen consort of King George V, he is in fact the great-great-grandfather of Queen Elizabeth II.
    It seems to me that the crisis was caused by the strict control exercised by George III over the marriages of his children, as you say. Six daughters who weren’t allowed to marry! If he wasn’t prepared to let them choose their own spouses then he should at least have made more effort to arrange marriages which they might have found acceptable.

    Reply
  2. I was looking at the children of George III yesterday, after seeing a portrait of them. I discovered that, because Adolphus, Duke of Cambridge was the grandfather of Mary of Teck, Queen consort of King George V, he is in fact the great-great-grandfather of Queen Elizabeth II.
    It seems to me that the crisis was caused by the strict control exercised by George III over the marriages of his children, as you say. Six daughters who weren’t allowed to marry! If he wasn’t prepared to let them choose their own spouses then he should at least have made more effort to arrange marriages which they might have found acceptable.

    Reply
  3. I was looking at the children of George III yesterday, after seeing a portrait of them. I discovered that, because Adolphus, Duke of Cambridge was the grandfather of Mary of Teck, Queen consort of King George V, he is in fact the great-great-grandfather of Queen Elizabeth II.
    It seems to me that the crisis was caused by the strict control exercised by George III over the marriages of his children, as you say. Six daughters who weren’t allowed to marry! If he wasn’t prepared to let them choose their own spouses then he should at least have made more effort to arrange marriages which they might have found acceptable.

    Reply
  4. I was looking at the children of George III yesterday, after seeing a portrait of them. I discovered that, because Adolphus, Duke of Cambridge was the grandfather of Mary of Teck, Queen consort of King George V, he is in fact the great-great-grandfather of Queen Elizabeth II.
    It seems to me that the crisis was caused by the strict control exercised by George III over the marriages of his children, as you say. Six daughters who weren’t allowed to marry! If he wasn’t prepared to let them choose their own spouses then he should at least have made more effort to arrange marriages which they might have found acceptable.

    Reply
  5. I was looking at the children of George III yesterday, after seeing a portrait of them. I discovered that, because Adolphus, Duke of Cambridge was the grandfather of Mary of Teck, Queen consort of King George V, he is in fact the great-great-grandfather of Queen Elizabeth II.
    It seems to me that the crisis was caused by the strict control exercised by George III over the marriages of his children, as you say. Six daughters who weren’t allowed to marry! If he wasn’t prepared to let them choose their own spouses then he should at least have made more effort to arrange marriages which they might have found acceptable.

    Reply
  6. You’re right, HJ. As royal succession goes through the female line as well as the male, the princesses’ children could have been heirs.
    Mind you, if they’d done the traditional thing and married abroad that could have meant the heir was foreign and even a foreign prince or king, which would be another kind of mess. George III might have had that in mind.
    Prince Leopold, who married Charlotte, was basically a noble nobody who didn’t carry that threat.
    The princesses could have married British men, but there the danger was of creating a powerful house/faction. As things progressed, by the 19th century that hardly mattered, but in the mid 18th century it would have seemed a potential problem.

    Reply
  7. You’re right, HJ. As royal succession goes through the female line as well as the male, the princesses’ children could have been heirs.
    Mind you, if they’d done the traditional thing and married abroad that could have meant the heir was foreign and even a foreign prince or king, which would be another kind of mess. George III might have had that in mind.
    Prince Leopold, who married Charlotte, was basically a noble nobody who didn’t carry that threat.
    The princesses could have married British men, but there the danger was of creating a powerful house/faction. As things progressed, by the 19th century that hardly mattered, but in the mid 18th century it would have seemed a potential problem.

    Reply
  8. You’re right, HJ. As royal succession goes through the female line as well as the male, the princesses’ children could have been heirs.
    Mind you, if they’d done the traditional thing and married abroad that could have meant the heir was foreign and even a foreign prince or king, which would be another kind of mess. George III might have had that in mind.
    Prince Leopold, who married Charlotte, was basically a noble nobody who didn’t carry that threat.
    The princesses could have married British men, but there the danger was of creating a powerful house/faction. As things progressed, by the 19th century that hardly mattered, but in the mid 18th century it would have seemed a potential problem.

    Reply
  9. You’re right, HJ. As royal succession goes through the female line as well as the male, the princesses’ children could have been heirs.
    Mind you, if they’d done the traditional thing and married abroad that could have meant the heir was foreign and even a foreign prince or king, which would be another kind of mess. George III might have had that in mind.
    Prince Leopold, who married Charlotte, was basically a noble nobody who didn’t carry that threat.
    The princesses could have married British men, but there the danger was of creating a powerful house/faction. As things progressed, by the 19th century that hardly mattered, but in the mid 18th century it would have seemed a potential problem.

    Reply
  10. You’re right, HJ. As royal succession goes through the female line as well as the male, the princesses’ children could have been heirs.
    Mind you, if they’d done the traditional thing and married abroad that could have meant the heir was foreign and even a foreign prince or king, which would be another kind of mess. George III might have had that in mind.
    Prince Leopold, who married Charlotte, was basically a noble nobody who didn’t carry that threat.
    The princesses could have married British men, but there the danger was of creating a powerful house/faction. As things progressed, by the 19th century that hardly mattered, but in the mid 18th century it would have seemed a potential problem.

    Reply
  11. Jo, this is indeed a fascinating nexu of history–a huge “what if?” If Princess Charlotte had had decent medical care, she would have survived and quite possibly had other children. No Victorian Age. I really like the Sophie Page book TO MARRY A PRINCE, which posits that Charlotte survived and was the ancestor of different modern royals. It made for a good romance, but it also spun off of intriguing history.
    I used Charlotte as a real character in one of my books, NOWHERE NEAR RESPECTABLE. I show her as an unhappy but decent girl several years before her marriage. What sort of queen would she have become???

    Reply
  12. Jo, this is indeed a fascinating nexu of history–a huge “what if?” If Princess Charlotte had had decent medical care, she would have survived and quite possibly had other children. No Victorian Age. I really like the Sophie Page book TO MARRY A PRINCE, which posits that Charlotte survived and was the ancestor of different modern royals. It made for a good romance, but it also spun off of intriguing history.
    I used Charlotte as a real character in one of my books, NOWHERE NEAR RESPECTABLE. I show her as an unhappy but decent girl several years before her marriage. What sort of queen would she have become???

    Reply
  13. Jo, this is indeed a fascinating nexu of history–a huge “what if?” If Princess Charlotte had had decent medical care, she would have survived and quite possibly had other children. No Victorian Age. I really like the Sophie Page book TO MARRY A PRINCE, which posits that Charlotte survived and was the ancestor of different modern royals. It made for a good romance, but it also spun off of intriguing history.
    I used Charlotte as a real character in one of my books, NOWHERE NEAR RESPECTABLE. I show her as an unhappy but decent girl several years before her marriage. What sort of queen would she have become???

    Reply
  14. Jo, this is indeed a fascinating nexu of history–a huge “what if?” If Princess Charlotte had had decent medical care, she would have survived and quite possibly had other children. No Victorian Age. I really like the Sophie Page book TO MARRY A PRINCE, which posits that Charlotte survived and was the ancestor of different modern royals. It made for a good romance, but it also spun off of intriguing history.
    I used Charlotte as a real character in one of my books, NOWHERE NEAR RESPECTABLE. I show her as an unhappy but decent girl several years before her marriage. What sort of queen would she have become???

    Reply
  15. Jo, this is indeed a fascinating nexu of history–a huge “what if?” If Princess Charlotte had had decent medical care, she would have survived and quite possibly had other children. No Victorian Age. I really like the Sophie Page book TO MARRY A PRINCE, which posits that Charlotte survived and was the ancestor of different modern royals. It made for a good romance, but it also spun off of intriguing history.
    I used Charlotte as a real character in one of my books, NOWHERE NEAR RESPECTABLE. I show her as an unhappy but decent girl several years before her marriage. What sort of queen would she have become???

    Reply
  16. I knew bits and pieces and I remembered that with the death of Princess Charlotte all the unmarried Duke’s scrambled to get married. But I didn’t know all these details which really fill out the picture.
    Interesting coincidence that you did a post on Princess Charlotte on the same day the new Princess Charlotte’s name was announced.

    Reply
  17. I knew bits and pieces and I remembered that with the death of Princess Charlotte all the unmarried Duke’s scrambled to get married. But I didn’t know all these details which really fill out the picture.
    Interesting coincidence that you did a post on Princess Charlotte on the same day the new Princess Charlotte’s name was announced.

    Reply
  18. I knew bits and pieces and I remembered that with the death of Princess Charlotte all the unmarried Duke’s scrambled to get married. But I didn’t know all these details which really fill out the picture.
    Interesting coincidence that you did a post on Princess Charlotte on the same day the new Princess Charlotte’s name was announced.

    Reply
  19. I knew bits and pieces and I remembered that with the death of Princess Charlotte all the unmarried Duke’s scrambled to get married. But I didn’t know all these details which really fill out the picture.
    Interesting coincidence that you did a post on Princess Charlotte on the same day the new Princess Charlotte’s name was announced.

    Reply
  20. I knew bits and pieces and I remembered that with the death of Princess Charlotte all the unmarried Duke’s scrambled to get married. But I didn’t know all these details which really fill out the picture.
    Interesting coincidence that you did a post on Princess Charlotte on the same day the new Princess Charlotte’s name was announced.

    Reply
  21. I wonder what the stats are for people of that time. We don’t always know about early miscarriages, so we don’t know if there was no conception or nothing came of them.
    It is possible that inbreeding was a factor with the German marriages, but Victoria married a German with family connections and she had plenty of children. And, of course, George III had married a German princess and had lots.

    Reply
  22. I wonder what the stats are for people of that time. We don’t always know about early miscarriages, so we don’t know if there was no conception or nothing came of them.
    It is possible that inbreeding was a factor with the German marriages, but Victoria married a German with family connections and she had plenty of children. And, of course, George III had married a German princess and had lots.

    Reply
  23. I wonder what the stats are for people of that time. We don’t always know about early miscarriages, so we don’t know if there was no conception or nothing came of them.
    It is possible that inbreeding was a factor with the German marriages, but Victoria married a German with family connections and she had plenty of children. And, of course, George III had married a German princess and had lots.

    Reply
  24. I wonder what the stats are for people of that time. We don’t always know about early miscarriages, so we don’t know if there was no conception or nothing came of them.
    It is possible that inbreeding was a factor with the German marriages, but Victoria married a German with family connections and she had plenty of children. And, of course, George III had married a German princess and had lots.

    Reply
  25. I wonder what the stats are for people of that time. We don’t always know about early miscarriages, so we don’t know if there was no conception or nothing came of them.
    It is possible that inbreeding was a factor with the German marriages, but Victoria married a German with family connections and she had plenty of children. And, of course, George III had married a German princess and had lots.

    Reply
  26. Yes, it’s possible that Charlotte had an excess of care, something that can still happen today.
    It is interesting to speculate on her as queen. She might have been much like Victoria, who was moderated by Albert. Leopold seems to have been a steady man and to have loved her.

    Reply
  27. Yes, it’s possible that Charlotte had an excess of care, something that can still happen today.
    It is interesting to speculate on her as queen. She might have been much like Victoria, who was moderated by Albert. Leopold seems to have been a steady man and to have loved her.

    Reply
  28. Yes, it’s possible that Charlotte had an excess of care, something that can still happen today.
    It is interesting to speculate on her as queen. She might have been much like Victoria, who was moderated by Albert. Leopold seems to have been a steady man and to have loved her.

    Reply
  29. Yes, it’s possible that Charlotte had an excess of care, something that can still happen today.
    It is interesting to speculate on her as queen. She might have been much like Victoria, who was moderated by Albert. Leopold seems to have been a steady man and to have loved her.

    Reply
  30. Yes, it’s possible that Charlotte had an excess of care, something that can still happen today.
    It is interesting to speculate on her as queen. She might have been much like Victoria, who was moderated by Albert. Leopold seems to have been a steady man and to have loved her.

    Reply
  31. Isn’t it, Vicki! I had no idea. I thought they’d go for Victoria or Elizabeth, but thinking about it, as she’s unlikely to be queen that might have been implying frustrated ambitions. The duke and duchess seem to be very sensible parents.

    Reply
  32. Isn’t it, Vicki! I had no idea. I thought they’d go for Victoria or Elizabeth, but thinking about it, as she’s unlikely to be queen that might have been implying frustrated ambitions. The duke and duchess seem to be very sensible parents.

    Reply
  33. Isn’t it, Vicki! I had no idea. I thought they’d go for Victoria or Elizabeth, but thinking about it, as she’s unlikely to be queen that might have been implying frustrated ambitions. The duke and duchess seem to be very sensible parents.

    Reply
  34. Isn’t it, Vicki! I had no idea. I thought they’d go for Victoria or Elizabeth, but thinking about it, as she’s unlikely to be queen that might have been implying frustrated ambitions. The duke and duchess seem to be very sensible parents.

    Reply
  35. Isn’t it, Vicki! I had no idea. I thought they’d go for Victoria or Elizabeth, but thinking about it, as she’s unlikely to be queen that might have been implying frustrated ambitions. The duke and duchess seem to be very sensible parents.

    Reply
  36. I didn’t know all those details, so thank you Jo. I always enjoy interesting historical background, As the others have said, this is very interesting.

    Reply
  37. I didn’t know all those details, so thank you Jo. I always enjoy interesting historical background, As the others have said, this is very interesting.

    Reply
  38. I didn’t know all those details, so thank you Jo. I always enjoy interesting historical background, As the others have said, this is very interesting.

    Reply
  39. I didn’t know all those details, so thank you Jo. I always enjoy interesting historical background, As the others have said, this is very interesting.

    Reply
  40. I didn’t know all those details, so thank you Jo. I always enjoy interesting historical background, As the others have said, this is very interesting.

    Reply
  41. The Royal marriage act is still in effect and affected 20th century marriages. R. Probert has written a book about all the troubles it has caused.
    Of course, it made the marriage of the Prince of Wales to Mrs. Fitzwilliam invalid. If not his marriage to a Catholic could have removed him from his place in the succession.
    Two people who were definitely hurt by the act were Sussex’s two children. The parents had married twice and yet the children were declared illegitimate and weren’t even recognized as heirs at all when he died. Clarence ditched Mrs. Jordan before 1817 and tried to find a bride. He seemed interested in Catherine Tilney Long who was an heiress. She turned him down though I doubt parliament would have approved of the match if she had accepted. There would have been plenty of heirs to the throne if the men had been as able to legitimatize their children as many seemed to think they were. Victoria had a prosperous reign– her children and grandchildren went to war against each other. It isn’t often that the death of two people has such a long lastng effect on a country and history.

    Reply
  42. The Royal marriage act is still in effect and affected 20th century marriages. R. Probert has written a book about all the troubles it has caused.
    Of course, it made the marriage of the Prince of Wales to Mrs. Fitzwilliam invalid. If not his marriage to a Catholic could have removed him from his place in the succession.
    Two people who were definitely hurt by the act were Sussex’s two children. The parents had married twice and yet the children were declared illegitimate and weren’t even recognized as heirs at all when he died. Clarence ditched Mrs. Jordan before 1817 and tried to find a bride. He seemed interested in Catherine Tilney Long who was an heiress. She turned him down though I doubt parliament would have approved of the match if she had accepted. There would have been plenty of heirs to the throne if the men had been as able to legitimatize their children as many seemed to think they were. Victoria had a prosperous reign– her children and grandchildren went to war against each other. It isn’t often that the death of two people has such a long lastng effect on a country and history.

    Reply
  43. The Royal marriage act is still in effect and affected 20th century marriages. R. Probert has written a book about all the troubles it has caused.
    Of course, it made the marriage of the Prince of Wales to Mrs. Fitzwilliam invalid. If not his marriage to a Catholic could have removed him from his place in the succession.
    Two people who were definitely hurt by the act were Sussex’s two children. The parents had married twice and yet the children were declared illegitimate and weren’t even recognized as heirs at all when he died. Clarence ditched Mrs. Jordan before 1817 and tried to find a bride. He seemed interested in Catherine Tilney Long who was an heiress. She turned him down though I doubt parliament would have approved of the match if she had accepted. There would have been plenty of heirs to the throne if the men had been as able to legitimatize their children as many seemed to think they were. Victoria had a prosperous reign– her children and grandchildren went to war against each other. It isn’t often that the death of two people has such a long lastng effect on a country and history.

    Reply
  44. The Royal marriage act is still in effect and affected 20th century marriages. R. Probert has written a book about all the troubles it has caused.
    Of course, it made the marriage of the Prince of Wales to Mrs. Fitzwilliam invalid. If not his marriage to a Catholic could have removed him from his place in the succession.
    Two people who were definitely hurt by the act were Sussex’s two children. The parents had married twice and yet the children were declared illegitimate and weren’t even recognized as heirs at all when he died. Clarence ditched Mrs. Jordan before 1817 and tried to find a bride. He seemed interested in Catherine Tilney Long who was an heiress. She turned him down though I doubt parliament would have approved of the match if she had accepted. There would have been plenty of heirs to the throne if the men had been as able to legitimatize their children as many seemed to think they were. Victoria had a prosperous reign– her children and grandchildren went to war against each other. It isn’t often that the death of two people has such a long lastng effect on a country and history.

    Reply
  45. The Royal marriage act is still in effect and affected 20th century marriages. R. Probert has written a book about all the troubles it has caused.
    Of course, it made the marriage of the Prince of Wales to Mrs. Fitzwilliam invalid. If not his marriage to a Catholic could have removed him from his place in the succession.
    Two people who were definitely hurt by the act were Sussex’s two children. The parents had married twice and yet the children were declared illegitimate and weren’t even recognized as heirs at all when he died. Clarence ditched Mrs. Jordan before 1817 and tried to find a bride. He seemed interested in Catherine Tilney Long who was an heiress. She turned him down though I doubt parliament would have approved of the match if she had accepted. There would have been plenty of heirs to the throne if the men had been as able to legitimatize their children as many seemed to think they were. Victoria had a prosperous reign– her children and grandchildren went to war against each other. It isn’t often that the death of two people has such a long lastng effect on a country and history.

    Reply
  46. This is a very interesting piece. A very surprising thing if you consider how prolific George III & his Queen were.
    And why did all those royals had such a low birth rate? Could it be that there were many miscarriages and stillborn babies or children that died in infancy?
    As having an heir was a problem also in many moments among the Kings of France and Spain, I guess it was a common thing that no many royals arrive to adulthood.
    Apart from that, I think there was an additional problem for the English royal family -suitable spouses were difficult to find. Because they had to marry someone of royal blood and also from the same religion.
    In Catholic countries it was not such a big problem because you had several royal families to chose – the Royal Families in Spain, France, Portugal, several in Italy, Austria and some German principalities that remained Catholic, as well as Poland in the Eastern part of the Continent.
    But there were not so many Protestant kingdoms. So they had very few options.
    In the Middle Ages things were different, a Royal infant from Castile could marry a princess from Norway or a Queen of Aragon could be a Hungarian-born princess.
    English kings were usually married to princesses from Castile, or France or the Low Lands. After the Reformation the ‘wedding market’ for royal protestants was sharply reduced.

    Reply
  47. This is a very interesting piece. A very surprising thing if you consider how prolific George III & his Queen were.
    And why did all those royals had such a low birth rate? Could it be that there were many miscarriages and stillborn babies or children that died in infancy?
    As having an heir was a problem also in many moments among the Kings of France and Spain, I guess it was a common thing that no many royals arrive to adulthood.
    Apart from that, I think there was an additional problem for the English royal family -suitable spouses were difficult to find. Because they had to marry someone of royal blood and also from the same religion.
    In Catholic countries it was not such a big problem because you had several royal families to chose – the Royal Families in Spain, France, Portugal, several in Italy, Austria and some German principalities that remained Catholic, as well as Poland in the Eastern part of the Continent.
    But there were not so many Protestant kingdoms. So they had very few options.
    In the Middle Ages things were different, a Royal infant from Castile could marry a princess from Norway or a Queen of Aragon could be a Hungarian-born princess.
    English kings were usually married to princesses from Castile, or France or the Low Lands. After the Reformation the ‘wedding market’ for royal protestants was sharply reduced.

    Reply
  48. This is a very interesting piece. A very surprising thing if you consider how prolific George III & his Queen were.
    And why did all those royals had such a low birth rate? Could it be that there were many miscarriages and stillborn babies or children that died in infancy?
    As having an heir was a problem also in many moments among the Kings of France and Spain, I guess it was a common thing that no many royals arrive to adulthood.
    Apart from that, I think there was an additional problem for the English royal family -suitable spouses were difficult to find. Because they had to marry someone of royal blood and also from the same religion.
    In Catholic countries it was not such a big problem because you had several royal families to chose – the Royal Families in Spain, France, Portugal, several in Italy, Austria and some German principalities that remained Catholic, as well as Poland in the Eastern part of the Continent.
    But there were not so many Protestant kingdoms. So they had very few options.
    In the Middle Ages things were different, a Royal infant from Castile could marry a princess from Norway or a Queen of Aragon could be a Hungarian-born princess.
    English kings were usually married to princesses from Castile, or France or the Low Lands. After the Reformation the ‘wedding market’ for royal protestants was sharply reduced.

    Reply
  49. This is a very interesting piece. A very surprising thing if you consider how prolific George III & his Queen were.
    And why did all those royals had such a low birth rate? Could it be that there were many miscarriages and stillborn babies or children that died in infancy?
    As having an heir was a problem also in many moments among the Kings of France and Spain, I guess it was a common thing that no many royals arrive to adulthood.
    Apart from that, I think there was an additional problem for the English royal family -suitable spouses were difficult to find. Because they had to marry someone of royal blood and also from the same religion.
    In Catholic countries it was not such a big problem because you had several royal families to chose – the Royal Families in Spain, France, Portugal, several in Italy, Austria and some German principalities that remained Catholic, as well as Poland in the Eastern part of the Continent.
    But there were not so many Protestant kingdoms. So they had very few options.
    In the Middle Ages things were different, a Royal infant from Castile could marry a princess from Norway or a Queen of Aragon could be a Hungarian-born princess.
    English kings were usually married to princesses from Castile, or France or the Low Lands. After the Reformation the ‘wedding market’ for royal protestants was sharply reduced.

    Reply
  50. This is a very interesting piece. A very surprising thing if you consider how prolific George III & his Queen were.
    And why did all those royals had such a low birth rate? Could it be that there were many miscarriages and stillborn babies or children that died in infancy?
    As having an heir was a problem also in many moments among the Kings of France and Spain, I guess it was a common thing that no many royals arrive to adulthood.
    Apart from that, I think there was an additional problem for the English royal family -suitable spouses were difficult to find. Because they had to marry someone of royal blood and also from the same religion.
    In Catholic countries it was not such a big problem because you had several royal families to chose – the Royal Families in Spain, France, Portugal, several in Italy, Austria and some German principalities that remained Catholic, as well as Poland in the Eastern part of the Continent.
    But there were not so many Protestant kingdoms. So they had very few options.
    In the Middle Ages things were different, a Royal infant from Castile could marry a princess from Norway or a Queen of Aragon could be a Hungarian-born princess.
    English kings were usually married to princesses from Castile, or France or the Low Lands. After the Reformation the ‘wedding market’ for royal protestants was sharply reduced.

    Reply
  51. I do think Leopold cared for Charlotte. If I remember correctly, he remarried after her death and had a daughter whom he named Charlotte in her memory. Sadly, the daughter was married to Maximilian, imposed as ruler of Mexico. After he was executed, she went mad.

    Reply
  52. I do think Leopold cared for Charlotte. If I remember correctly, he remarried after her death and had a daughter whom he named Charlotte in her memory. Sadly, the daughter was married to Maximilian, imposed as ruler of Mexico. After he was executed, she went mad.

    Reply
  53. I do think Leopold cared for Charlotte. If I remember correctly, he remarried after her death and had a daughter whom he named Charlotte in her memory. Sadly, the daughter was married to Maximilian, imposed as ruler of Mexico. After he was executed, she went mad.

    Reply
  54. I do think Leopold cared for Charlotte. If I remember correctly, he remarried after her death and had a daughter whom he named Charlotte in her memory. Sadly, the daughter was married to Maximilian, imposed as ruler of Mexico. After he was executed, she went mad.

    Reply
  55. I do think Leopold cared for Charlotte. If I remember correctly, he remarried after her death and had a daughter whom he named Charlotte in her memory. Sadly, the daughter was married to Maximilian, imposed as ruler of Mexico. After he was executed, she went mad.

    Reply

Leave a Comment