His status as King-consort was also dependant on the marriage being consummated. Had he protested that it wasn't Isabel II would have had enough grounds to ask for an annulment from the Pope and remarry.
still the question remains did a 19th century Spanish man have to acknowledge children born to his wife or were they legally his because they were born during the marriage?
The rule is that "any child conceived during the period of the marriage is presumed to be the child of the couple".
Naturally, such presumption can be questioned.
So, if the man had reasons to doubt his wife's fidelity, he had the right to question and deny the paternity of the child.
1
Message Thread | This response ↓
« Back to index