|
|
Post by Avikar on Oct 23, 2011 2:59:52 GMT
Has their ever been a case where the only Princess was married off to a future king, with the belief that her brother would rule the kingdom she was...leaving. But the brother died before he could rule or have children, leaving her the only direct descendant of their father? I'd assume since she was married, and potentially Queen, the kingdom would go to her Uncle or someone similar? Am I correct? If so, what circumstances would their need to be before say, her and her husband would adopt the kingdom as theirs? And in those circumstances how would it be handled?
Princess, Queen and King are generic terms for this question. I'm not picky about the culture or the title the royal had, for example, Emperor, Grand Duches, Princeps...
|
|
|
|
Post by observer on Oct 24, 2011 0:35:34 GMT
Has their ever been a case where the only Princess was married off to a future king, with the belief that her brother would rule the kingdom she was...leaving. But the brother died before he could rule or have children, leaving her the only direct descendant of their father? I'd assume since she was married, and potentially Queen, the kingdom would go to her Uncle or someone similar? Am I correct? If so, what circumstances would their need to be before say, her and her husband would adopt the kingdom as theirs? And in those circumstances how would it be handled? Princess, Queen and King are generic terms for this question. I'm not picky about the culture or the title the royal had, for example, Emperor, Grand Duches, Princeps... Although this is not a full answer to your question, the former Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem several times passed through women in the absence of male heirs. Their husbands generally ruled de jure uxoris, however. |
|
|
|
Post by Cinderella on Oct 24, 2011 1:21:34 GMT
|
|
hovite
Member of the Court
Posts: 40
|
Post by hovite on Oct 27, 2011 13:45:35 GMT
Has their ever been a case where the only Princess was married off to a future king, with the belief that her brother would rule the kingdom she was...leaving. But the brother died before he could rule or have children, leaving her the only direct descendant of their father? I'd assume since she was married, and potentially Queen, the kingdom would go to her Uncle or someone similar? This sort of situation did arise a few times during the Mediaeval period, and, tragically, the result was often civil war. One of the best known cases is that of the Empress Matilda. She was the daughter of Henry I, King of England & Duke of Normandy. His only legitimate son was drowned in 1120, so he named his daughter Matilda as his heiress, but when Henry I died in 1135, the throne was seized by Matilda’s cousin, Stephen of Blois. Matilda was married twice, both times to foreign rulers. Her first husband was the Emperor Henry V, and her second was Geoffrey V, Count of Anjou. Because of these marriages she was usually referred to as Empress Matilda or Countess Matilda, to avoid confusion with Stephen’s wife, Queen Matilda. The Empress easily conquered Normandy, but her invasion of England produced a long civil war. Finally, in 1153, Stephen’s son Eustace died, and Stephen agreed to recognized Matilda’s son as his heir. Stephen died suddenly the following year, apparently of appendicitis, and he was succeeded by Matilda’s son, Henry II, even though Matilda herself was still alive. |
|
hovite
Member of the Court
Posts: 40
|
Post by hovite on Oct 28, 2011 10:08:44 GMT
The was a similar case in Portugal. In 1371 King Fernando I of Portugal married Leonor Teles de Menezes (though she was already married to someone else). They had two sons, who died in infancy, and a daughter Beatrice, who was born in 1372, and married (aged 11) to the King of Castile in 1382. When Fernando I died the following year, the King of Castile claimed Portugal and invaded, but was defeated two years later, and an illegitimate uncle of Beatrice was proclaimed King of Portugal.
|
|
