Royal wedding?

Question

Setting aside the religious issues, what would happen if two future sovereigns decide to get married? For example, if Victoria of Sweden decides to marry William of Wales, or Albert of Monaco? Would they have to give up their claim to the throne? Is there any legal precaution set for this?

Answer 1

One that is in line for the throne isn't supposed to marry someone that also has a claim to a throne. One has to give up their claim.

Answer 2

I believe if a heir such as William in the English monarchy were to marry, protocol lines him up with someone who is not considered a powerful heir to her country (more like a duchess, or a countess, or some distance counsin related to the monarchy).  I trust that the English monarchy already has someone lined up for him; the media doesn't know yet; nor does William.

Answer 3

The same thing as Isabella, Queen of Castile and Ferdinand, King of Aragon. They remain as sovereigns of their own country. Eventually Spain was united under their heirs.

Mary II of England and William of Orange is another case. Though, contrary to the usual practice, Mary insisted that William (ruler of Holland) be crowned as William III of England along with her. Since they had no children, it did not unite the two countries.

Answer 4

It's doubtful that Victoria would marry either of the persons you name, but if she did neither her or her husband would have to renounce their claims to the respective thrones.

However, should Albert marry William then William would have to renounce his claim to the Duchy of Cornwall (currently a possession of his father and something which has been described as 'a licence to print money').

Answer 5

In the case of the British monarchy, it would be up to Parliament. Legally, if an heir to the British throne married someone and their children would be heirs to another throne as well, Parliament could delete that person and their children from the British line of succession, so they would inherit only one throne, not two.

Prince Philip was a possible (somewhat distant) heir to the throne of Greece when he married Princess Elizabeth in 1947, but he quite sensibly renounced this on his marriage, so his children have no rights to the Greek throne. The Queen might insist on a similar renouncement if a close heir to the British throne was to marry a distant heir to a foreign one.

But an old historical precedent for not giving up such a claim on marriage is that in 1501 Margaret Tudor, the sister of the future King Henry VIII of England, married King James IV of Scotland. Eventually two of their grandchildren married each other, and their child became King of Scotland through his great-grandfather James. Then in 1603, he became King of England through his great-grandmother Margaret, because Henry VIII's line was extinct.

Answer 6

Mary I of England married Philip who became Philip II of Spain. They had no children. Mary II married William of Orange but they had no children either.

If two ruling monarchs married or the heirs to two thrones marry, the kingdoms are linked by their children. This happened with England and France after the Norman Conquest  until Mary I lost the last French possession and between England and Scotland with James I of England.

Answer 7

In the ancient times if the countries have a common border the two kingdoms become one,...but it shall not happen in the current century...

Currenty  the only possibility is that the woman denies to rule in her own country, passing the throne to the second in the line and she will become a queen in the country of his husband...

So, her and her brother or sister will rule at the same time...in different countries

Answer 8

Hypothetically, their heir would be heir to the throne of both countries (subject to the laws of succession of their respective countries).  Some countries may have laws that prevent their sovereign from also being monarch of another country, which might affect the marriage (or, at least, the rights of their heirs).