The European Royals Message Board
[ Post a response | The European Royals Message Board ]
User logged in as Eric VdV
Unfortunately, King Leopold III of the Belgians did not act so honorably, when contracting a controversial second marriage to the commoner Lilian Baels during wartime. Even though *equality* has never been formally required in the house laws of royal Belgium, and only the sovereign's consent is officially required (not that of Parliament or the prime minister), the union has never been regarded as dynastic. Consider that the second wife was never styled with the title of Queen. At most, the issue born to the marriage have been styled with the title Prince(ss) of Belgium, with the qualification of Royal Highness -- just like their mother. All this has led some legal experts to interpret the situation as a paradoxical case whereby a king married without his own consent. There actually was historical precedence for his -- the earlier example of the second marriage of the notorious King Leopold II.
Both Belgian cases were completely different matters.
King Leopold III contracted first in September a religious marriage and in December a civil one with Lilian Baels. Belgian law stipulates that a marriage should be first civil and afterwards catholic, so it was in contradicition with the Belgian law.
The supposed second marriage of King Leopold II to Blanche Delacroix, Baroness de Vaughan was not legal as it was only a religious marriage, so not officially valid by law.
Prince Karel/Charles did the samen with Jacqueline de Peyrebrunne.
Message Thread | This response ↓|