what is a royal family structure and purpose?

[kaddle]

i'm a bit confused by the concept of royal families. are they just like normal families but better? are they a certain part of a family that is merged with their nation's government? does each royal family serve different purposes and have different structures?

 

i'm asking because i'm writing a story and i want to make a royal family. it doesn't need to be exactly like real royal families. anyway, it would help a lot if someone could draw a diagram or provide an explanation. i can't really find what i'm looking for on google and there are a lot of mixed answers.

 

Royal Family Purpose:

i'm thinking that this royal family in particular could have greater importance than the nation's government, but only the king and the heir would have actual authority over the government, and the government mainly serves the king, rather than the rest of the royal family.

so the throne won't necessarily be merged with the government, instead they will rule over it as a superior party.

 

also this royal family will exist in fairly modern times, so i probably won't have any sword wielding knights appointed to defend royal family members.

 

Royal Family Structure:

the actual structure of the royal family is what is most confusing. let's start with the king at the center of the structure since that will make it easier.

 

King's Wife:

in this royal family structure the ruler (king or queen) is not allowed to have more than one spouse at a given time, and they are not allowed to have concubines.

does the wife of the king usually have any power? is she automatically considered the queen of the nation just for being married to the king? does it make any difference if the king's wife originates from a common family or was originally already a member of the royal family (like distantly related to the king?

 

King's progeny (throne succession):

let's say that the king has multiple children. i know that usually the heir is the firstborn. i think i'll keep that tradition in my story, but it won't be an absolute rule. the firstborn can decline the title of heir.

so i understand that after the king retires and the new king comes, the line of succession continues with the new king. but what happens to the new king's siblings? what place do they have in the royal family after the line of succession shifts to the new king?

 

Servant families:

are servant families the same thing as branch families or different family houses?

what is the social status of servant families relative to commoners?

are different parts of the royal family served by different servant families?

 

i'll edit this OP as needed.

[minibois]

Keep in mind there are many countries in the world, all with a different structure.

In many Western societies, the royal family is mainly a set of public figures which can be shown off to other countries. They serve very little political purpose and are basically there because they are born that way.

A lot of the times, they do have some official titles in politics though, but aren't that concerned with it. This would include the United Kingdom and Netherlands, where the highest monarch (queen and king at the moment in those nations respectively) serve as the person the political system works under. Technically they can do quite a bit, including blocking new laws.. But in practice I believe that is not really done much if at all.

 

Then there are countries where they only serve the 'public figure' role. That includes many more countries.

Then there also are countries where the monarchs are actually leaders of the country, I believe that is/was the case in Thailand? Don't quote me on that..

 

Just look up the monarchs in different countries to get an idea of what they do.

5 minutes ago, kaddle said:

King's Wife:

does the wife of the king usually have any power?

Depends. I mean, it's entirely possible the Queen is actually the first in line for the throne, in which case this question wouldn't make sense anymore..

But I don't think there are particular ways 'the wife' wouldn't have power..

7 minutes ago, kaddle said:

is she automatically considered the queen of the nation just for being married to the king? does it make any difference if the king's wife originates from a common family or was originally already a member of the royal family (like distantly related to the king?

- Yes.

- No.

But of course there will be monarchs that are not happy with this sort of stuff.. Just look up the story of Lady Diana.

Recent examples of 'normal people' becoming part of a royal family may include (Duchess) Kate Middleton of the UK and (Queen) Maxima of the Netherlands.

Quote

so i understand that after the king retires and the new king comes, the line of succession continues with the new king. but what happens to the new king's siblings? what place do they have in the royal family after the line of succession shifts to the new king?

They can still be a crown prince(ss), in case the new King/Queen (their sibling) has no children.

Take a look at the different lines of succession around the world. They usually go from King/Queen, to their firstborn child (may or may not include females), then their children, their children.. etc. But if the first in line doesn't have children, it will default to any siblings.

 

But usually these people serve a ceremonial role ("Prince X attended this charity event" and such) and can of course get more normal-ish jobs too.

 

No idea about the servant stuff.

 

What I recommend is you do some research in how different countries deal with monarchies, write down the similarities, write down the differences and from there you can choose what you look best from that set.

[EldritchMoose]

16 minutes ago, kaddle said:

'm a bit confused by the concept of royal families. are they just like normal families but better? are they a certain part of a family that is merged with their nation's government? does each royal family serve different purposes and have different structures?

Honestly, at it's core a royal family is pretty much just a family that can trace its lineage back to past royalty. It's pretty much just like any family except they come from a long line of regents, heads of state and landowners rather than bakers, blacksmiths and barrel hoopers.

 

If you were to research various royal families through European history, though, you'll probably find that "better" is a very subjective term because in an effort to keep their bloodlines "pure," royal families (and other noble families, for that matter) had a tendency towards encouraging inbreeding simply because they thought themselves to be better families than the common rabble. Hell, you'll still get a lot of media attention whenever a prince (I'd imagine the same would happen for princesses, but the most recent examples that I'm aware of have all been princes who marries either commoners or daughters of people with close ties to dictators) marries someone "of less than noble blood."

 

Their role in national politics varies from country to country. Over here in the Netherlands, our King has a very limited role - essentially he only really gets to present our version of a State of the Union, outlining the country's policy for the coming year. Note that he only gets to present it, the speech itself is written by the members of our Cabinet. Aside from that, he addresses the nation at Christmas. In international politics, our King and Queen both serve a more diplomatic role, forging and maintaining international relationships between our country and others. Tbh, the King or Queen's spouse seems to fulfill a similar function to the First Lady's, while our Prime Minister's wife is largely nonexistent (the current one's single) but even when our PM is married, his wife tends to either stay out of the spotlight, or in the case of our previous PM, just continues her life as normal, continuing her job. I don't know if this would be different if the spouse in question is male, as that has not yet happened.

[wasab]

There are still many absolute monarchies in modern days but few are purely hereditary anymore. 

All of them would have a constitution but in practice, the monarchs are outside the rule of the law. 

 

saudi arabia, brunei, and even the Vatican are all technically absolute monarchies. 

[Andreas Lilja]

Can't believe we still have monarchies in 2019. Heck, decades.

[Unforgiving]

We keep them for Americans and Chinese folk to take photos outside their house 

[Doolameister]

Royal families can have a direct link or none (figure heads). 

[dalekphalm]

One thing to note about Kings and Queens: In the UK, the monarch’s spouse (in modern times) is not automatically crowned. 

 

Eg: The current monarch: Queen Elizabeth II. She was married before she rose to the throne. When she did rise to the throne, her husband (Prince Phillip) was not crowned as King, despite being married to the now Queen. He was already a prince, and retained that title. 

 

The heir is Prince Charles. His wife is Camilla (duchess of Wales). When he comes King, she will not be named Queen. 

 

This actually caused some controversy when Elizabeth II was being crowned as Queen. Prince Phillip’s family always assumed that Phillip would be named King when Elizabeth’s father died. This was not the case. Elizabeth’s children took on her name specifically so that the throne would continue to be that of the Windsor line. 

 

Mother countries do it differently, where if you marry the king (or queen) you become the queen (or king) automatically. 

[dizmo]

This sounds more like us trying to do your homework.

[wasab]

1 hour ago, dalekphalm said:

One thing to note about Kings and Queens: In the UK, the monarch’s spouse (in modern times) is not automatically crowned. 

 

Eg: The current monarch: Queen Elizabeth II. She was married before she rose to the throne. When she did rise to the throne, her husband (Prince Phillip) was not crowned as King, despite being married to the now Queen. He was already a prince, and retained that title. 

 

The heir is Prince Charles. His wife is Camilla (duchess of Wales). When he comes King, she will not be named Queen. 

 

This actually caused some controversy when Elizabeth II was being crowned as Queen. Prince Phillip’s family always assumed that Phillip would be named King when Elizabeth’s father died. This was not the case. Elizabeth’s children took on her name specifically so that the throne would continue to be that of the Windsor line. 

 

Mother countries do it differently, where if you marry the king (or queen) you become the queen (or king) automatically. 

The biggest perks about marrying into royal family is the title. I mean earl, dukes, barons, and counts? Sounds sweet. You can obviously laugh at the common peasants and tell them how much higher you are in the social hierarchy. 

[zassou]

i always think people in royal families are quite pathetic, they have basically no me time, no personal freedom. especially the monarch or the heir to the throne.

they born with only one purpose: to serve the country. anything they say, they do, they eat, they seeing anyone, are under the microscope. you can't get divorced, if you do so millions of people call you a fucking cheater, and someone you used to love would run away and seeing a rich egyptian guy and hit a pillar in the chunnel....

 

for someone like me who lost a part of my life, i truly feel sorry for them.

 

see the last emperor of japan? he is so overworked that he have no choice but break the law and ask his fellow people for allowing him to retire...poor old man...

[Donut417]

On 9/15/2019 at 2:02 PM, kaddle said:

certain part of a family that is merged with their nation's government?

In some cases the countries were rules by those families, but they still exist in the 21st century. In some cases they might still have the power, or they have limited power, it just depends on that countries government evolved. In some cases the power of the royal family was taken away. An example of this is what happen in Japan. 

[Donut417]

5 hours ago, zassou said:

overworked t

Maybe he just wanted to enjoy life outside the spot light. Its not like he had any real political authority. The US took that away after WW2. 

[wasab]

19 hours ago, zassou said:

i always think people in royal families are quite pathetic, they have basically no me time, no personal freedom. especially the monarch or the heir to the throne.

they born with only one purpose: to serve the country. anything they say, they do, they eat, they seeing anyone, are under the microscope. you can't get divorced, if you do so millions of people call you a fucking cheater, and someone you used to love would run away and seeing a rich egyptian guy and hit a pillar in the chunnel....

 

for someone like me who lost a part of my life, i truly feel sorry for them.

 

see the last emperor of japan? he is so overworked that he have no choice but break the law and ask his fellow people for allowing him to retire...poor old man...

And they are filthy rich. You know how much $$$ the British royal family is worth? You don't need to be a monarch to get your hands on the family fortune. Elizabeth's entire extended family is filthy rich. 

[wasab]

13 hours ago, Donut417 said:

In some cases the countries were rules by those families, but they still exist in the 21st century. In some cases they might still have the power, or they have limited power, it just depends on that countries government evolved. In some cases the power of the royal family was taken away. An example of this is what happen in Japan. 

Japanese emperors have always been a figure head. Their powers were taken away since Shogun was a thing. Meji restoration was just a brief departure from that historical norm. Taking away Japanese imperial power was going back to the old days, not moving into the future. 

[Donut417]

39 minutes ago, wasab said:

Japanese emperors have always been a figure head. Their powers were taken away since Shogun was a thing. Meji restoration was just a brief departure from that historical norm. Taking away Japanese imperial power was going back to the old days, not moving into the future. 

Ahhh the US took the emperors powers away. It was the punishment for bringing us in to the war. They currently have no powers under their current constitution. Which the US helped write. 

[Guest]

On 9/15/2019 at 11:32 PM, kaddle said:

i'm a bit confused by the concept of royal families. are they just like normal families but better? are they a certain part of a family that is merged with their nation's government? does each royal family serve different purposes and have different structures?

 

i'm asking because i'm writing a story and i want to make a royal family. it doesn't need to be exactly like real royal families. anyway, it would help a lot if someone could draw a diagram or provide an explanation. i can't really find what i'm looking for on google and there are a lot of mixed answers.

 

Royal Family Purpose:

i'm thinking that this royal family in particular could have greater importance than the nation's government, but only the king and the heir would have actual authority over the government, and the government mainly serves the king, rather than the rest of the royal family.

so the throne won't necessarily be merged with the government, instead they will rule over it as a superior party.

 

also this royal family will exist in fairly modern times, so i probably won't have any sword wielding knights appointed to defend royal family members.

 

Royal Family Structure:

the actual structure of the royal family is what is most confusing. let's start with the king at the center of the structure since that will make it easier.

 

King's Wife:

in this royal family structure the ruler (king or queen) is not allowed to have more than one spouse at a given time, and they are not allowed to have concubines.

does the wife of the king usually have any power? is she automatically considered the queen of the nation just for being married to the king? does it make any difference if the king's wife originates from a common family or was originally already a member of the royal family (like distantly related to the king?

 

King's progeny (throne succession):

let's say that the king has multiple children. i know that usually the heir is the firstborn. i think i'll keep that tradition in my story, but it won't be an absolute rule. the firstborn can decline the title of heir.

so i understand that after the king retires and the new king comes, the line of succession continues with the new king. but what happens to the new king's siblings? what place do they have in the royal family after the line of succession shifts to the new king?

 

Servant families:

are servant families the same thing as branch families or different family houses?

what is the social status of servant families relative to commoners?

are different parts of the royal family served by different servant families?

 

i'll edit this OP as needed.

You could watch this video by CGP Gray 

I don't know whether its going to help, but sure hope so