I was wondering if there is any correlation between royal status and possessing wealth. The situation here is that many books have been written and recorded dating as far back as AD 62 tracing back the lineage of a particular sect of family of high priests that reveals royal lineage however presently the family today has been spreadabout through various parts of the world where some are very wealthy and affluent and others are living among middle class yet the public and society among thie community still revel and acknowledge their royalty despite the fact some are not wealthy. Is this possible? Have you heard of this before?
2006-06-13 03:27:14 · 15 answers · asked by Truth 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Royalty
No. A title doesn't mean that a person is wealthy. Crown Prince Pavlos of Greece and his brother,Nicolas,both hold jobs.Pavlos also married a very wealthy woman.
Many aristocratic families have to sell off property to pay taxes these days,or sell the family seat(the residence),or open up the home to tourists to generate the wealth required to maintain and run such large houses and grounds.Royals and aristocrats also may hold jobs;Prince Michael of Kent is a board member of several institutions.Prince Edward used to run his own entertainment production company before his mother,the Queen told him to close down shop and take on more Royal duties(she pays him,now).
You would be surprised that there are many title holders living all over the world who don't have power or money associated with the Royals who do rule.Generally,the Royals who rule are the ones with the money;the farther down the succession line,the less money the member may have.
Case in point: Jamie Lee Curtis' husband,Christopher Guest holds a title;that title does not generate money.Christopher Guest makes his own money in the entertainment business.
A title is often just a courtesy title that does not make the possessor wealthy.Unless the title comes with lands that generate income,like the Prince of Wales,titles are just that...titles.
2006-06-13 07:04:30 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Family fortunes rise and fall. Plus, many people descended from royalty are descended from the younger brothers and sisters of whoever inherited the throne.
In societies that go by primogeniture, younger children don't inherit much. You could be the son or daughter of a monarch, but your fortunes were still dependent on making a good marriage. Many times these marriages were to people who didn't necessarily have the same social status - but who had money. It was considered a win-win situation for both.
After a couple of generations without a new infusion of royal blood, the pride in being descended from royalty might remain, but the current family members would only be distant cousins to the new king or queen. Generations after that, it's easy to see how the family legend could continue on without it making a speck of difference to their middle class lives.
2006-06-13 15:24:39 · answer #2 · answered by poohba 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Being part of a royal bloodline definitely doesn't mean you are automatically wealthy. Some 'royals' are right on the poverty line, but they are still proud of their background.
If you trace any family who once had wealth, you'll find that as the family fortune is divided and subdivided among several generations, pretty soon there isn't much left.
2006-06-13 15:18:39 · answer #3 · answered by old lady 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is no correlation between royal status and possessing wealth. It is a mere coincidence that royalty posses wealth. Also royalty often collect a small portion of tax to pay for business expenses, their salary does not exceed any more than your average head of state's salary.
2006-06-13 15:59:43 · answer #4 · answered by kingfernidad 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no just means you have a famous relative. Not that you have their money.
Not all royal families are wealthy. We only think the are because of Europe. But kings from Africa are not as well off.
2006-06-17 21:32:42 · answer #5 · answered by Layla 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They say the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, but some people like to spend money faster then they can make it. So no it does not me they are all wealthy
2006-06-13 10:32:27 · answer #6 · answered by Mr. Wonderful 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
My (not so) Great Aunt's family tree search led her to believe we are descended from the first king of a unified Norway. This may or may not be true, but most of generations of my family were of farm/peasant stock.
2006-06-14 03:21:26 · answer #7 · answered by Jason A 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There have actually been some bankrupt monarchs. Study the Kings of France.
2006-06-13 18:51:08 · answer #8 · answered by mudge741 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not necisairly wealthy. I'm a Wenceslaus [ like the christmas carol "good king wenceslaus] and not wealthy.
2006-06-13 12:53:48 · answer #9 · answered by Abria 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. It's not that uncommon.
There are lots of people with "royal blood" who are living hand-to-mouth.
2006-06-13 10:33:43 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋