Posted by M.Sjostrom on 4/11/2009, 11:10:25, in reply to "Re: interesting new information on the Romanian RF by Marlene"
82.181.239.182

indeed, it has been already previously discussed also here that quite attestedly, royalty and nobility have a lot of ancestresses from somewhat lesser social beckground and usually with exquisite looks, who supplied their sexual services to a higher male (be it a king or a fürst, for example) and gave birth to children who were often at a higher level (of aristocracy) than their mother originally was - then some (but not all) of those children became ancestors of royalty and nobility. That sort of heritage 'in their veins', it is of course not *unexpected* that members of royal families have sexual liaisons and children without 'the benefit of marriage'. I keep having reminiscences of queen Isabel II of Spain, who obviously had a solid cultural heritage of such foremothers. She certainly did not shy away from having sexual partners with whom she was not married, and shied not away from (presumably) having children with them. However, royalty and nobility has a traditional stance against issue born outside of marriage, evidenced by the fact that in Europe usually noble and royal titles and rights to succession to thrones, are not allowed via out-of-marriage parenthood. Illegitimate children of royals and nobles are not royals and nobles of the same title, same rank, and same rights of succession. So, illegitimacy sort of defeats the purpose of 'watching royalty', because such children are not royals. watching them is rather like watching their parents' such 'royal' doings which led to the children to not be entitled to royalty. I am aware that there are those royalty watchers who are really fascinated over what illegitimates some royal(s) produced. I have no doubt that Irina was raised with an understanding that women of her family should be married when having children. I venture a proposition that this structural discrimination against illegitimacy in the royalty and nobility has actually been a direct counter-measure to their often-seen tendency to make children outside marriage. Namely, if the number of illegitimacies among the royalty and nobility would have been nonexistent or minuscule, then such a clearly-defined (and affirmed by a lot of precedents in European history) stance against illegitimacies of royals and nobles, would not been necessary nor visible. Well, it should be remembered that -even if it were quite normal and usual for commoners- this little girl fails to meet several criteria of 'being royal' - for example, she does not even have a theoretical succession right to an existing or former throne. --Previous Message-- : : : --Previous Message-- : What is "embarassing" about not : being married and having a partner and a : child with him? It is quite normal. : : Nothing emberassing ang quite normal, yes. : But still frowned upon by some, perhaps more : so in the "higher classes". : : Sjöström is off course only specutlating : about the feelings of Princess Irina in this : case. :