Rules of Succession

[royalsmartie]

Not unless the line died out all but them.But I wish they would have female rulers in the middle east why not? Muslims say men and women are equal why is being female means you can carry your father's name if your the oldest child???? Or the only child???

 

[wbenson]

Purely hypothetical: if two members of two different royal families marry, will one of them always lose their place in succession to the throne?
Example: say, Isabella, daughter of then King Frederik of Denmark, marries the future second son of then Queen Victoria of Sweden. So Isabella would become a Swedish princess and lose her place in succession to the Danish throne? Would it be possible to "merge" and make them Prince and Princess of Sweden and Denmark? I imagine it should be pretty tough for the one giving up their nationality, especially because they grew up to represent their country! Would anyone know when the last marriage between two ruling families took place?
I know that Queen Anne-Marie lost her place in the Danish line, but she married a king, that's why I'm deliberately asking about the younger children of rulers!

It doesn't always happen. British royals who have married into foreign royal families keep their place, which is why so many European royal families also have a distant place in the line for the British throne. However, it's impossible to renounce it (only Parliament can alter succession laws), so even if a British princess wanted to lose her place, she couldn't. It's quite possibly easier in other countries.

 

[MAfan]

A British Princess can lose her place, if she marries a Catholic.

To respond to Bibliophilia's question, there is not a general rule on the matter, as far as I know. Some monarchies don't allow personal unions between two thrones (Christian of Denmark could not marry Ingrid of Norway, unless one of them renounces to his rights to the Throne), but this regards only Kings and Queens; so I don't think that a marriage between Prince and a Princess who are not both heirs presumptive may be a problem.

 

[Lumutqueen]

Primogeniture.

I didn't know if there was a general thread about this, applying to all Royal Families.

Primogeniture is the right, by law or custom, of the first-born to inherit the entire estate, to the exclusion of younger siblings.

There are 6 types.

1. Absolute, equal or lineal primogeniture, known in French as aînesse intégrale (integral primogeniture), is inheritance by the oldest surviving child without regard to gender. It is also known as (full) cognatic primogeniture today. This form of primogeniture was not practiced by any modern monarchy before 1980.

This applies to Sweden, The Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, and Norway.

2. "Agnatic primogeniture" or "patrilineal primogeniture" is inheritance according to seniority of birth among the sons of a monarch or head of family, with sons and their male issue inheriting before brothers and their issue, and male-line males inheriting before females of the male line.

3. "Agnatic-cognatic primogeniture" allows female agnates (or their descendants) to inherit once there are no surviving male agnates.

4. "Male preference primogeniture" (also known as "mixed-female succession" and as "cognatic" primogeniture) allows a female to succeed if she has no living brothers and no deceased brothers who left surviving legitimate descendants.

This applies to Monaco, Spain and UK.

5. "Matrilineal primogeniture" is a form of succession where the eldest female child inherits the throne to the total exclusion of males.

6. "Uterine (or Ovarian) primogeniture" A right of succession may also be inherited by a male through a female ancestor or spouse, to the exclusion of any female heir who might be older or of nearer proximity of blood.

Should all royal families have Absolute/Equal Primogenture?

 

[Kotroman]

Well, for one, Japan should not practice the same kind of primogeniture that's practiced by Sweden. For around 2000 years, the right to sit on the Chrysanthemum Throne passed through males only. Women reigned as emperors (i.e. empresses regnant) but were never succeeded by their own children (unless those children were fathered by a male-line descendant of the imperial family). Thus, I believe that the 2000-year-long line of emperors who share the same patrilineal descent should not be broken. Perhaps it would be best to allow Aiko to succeed on condition that Hisahito and his descendants succeed her. Similar scenarios have taken place in the Japanese past.

There are more royal families which take their patrilineal descent seriously. The Jordanian Royal family, for example, is quite proud of being descended from the last Prophet's daughter through an unbroken male line (and thus also being the Prophet's agnates). The Jordanian monarchy has no firmly established tradition as Japan does, so I would not mind seeing a queen regnant after King Hussein II - but I don't see this coming.

I am absolutely opposed to passing an Act of Parliament that would enable British peerage titles to descend according to absolute cognatic primogeniture. It would be unfair towards all the females who have been skipped in favour of their male relatives. Creating some new titles with remainder to heirs regardless of gender - OK, but introducing a change that would lead to Beatrice, 2nd Duchess of York instead of Prince Henry, Duke of York is undesirable (IMO).

 

[Princess Agnes]

Lumutqueen,

I believe you forgot Salic Law, by which female descendants are totally barred from succession. This was, for exemple, the case of the french monarchy.

 

[asma]

Lumutqueen,

I believe you forgot Salic Law, by which female descendants are totally barred from succession. This was, for exemple, the case of the french monarchy.

and also the case of royal family of Savoy.

 

[HM Queen Catherine]

I am absolutely opposed to passing an Act of Parliament that would enable British peerage titles to descend according to absolute cognatic primogeniture. It would be unfair towards all the females who have been skipped in favour of their male relatives. Creating some new titles with remainder to heirs regardless of gender - OK, but introducing a change that would lead to Beatrice, 2nd Duchess of York instead of Prince Henry, Duke of York is undesirable (IMO).

I am not necessarily opposed to an Act of Parliament granting absolute cognatic primogeniture.. but the peerage laws are in place to keep a title or dignity within the same family.

It wouldn't be a bad idea, IMO, to modify the laws to allow a woman to succeed if she has no surviving brothers.. as was the case with Henrietta Churchill Godolphin - with an Act of Parliament in 1706 allowing her to succeed her father to the Dukedom of Marlborough. Unfortunately, her son and heir died without issue 3 years before she did.

But whatever is decided or passed, and given the longevity of the Queen's family thus far, I doubt Prince Harry will ever get the opportunity to be Duke of York. And I doubt Princess Beatrice will be her father's successor in that title either, as it is traditionally given to the monarch's "spare".

On the other hand, allowing Beatrice to become Duchess of York might not be a bad thing.. maybe it would break the bad luck of that particular title.

 

[NGalitzine]

What do you mean by bad luck regarding the York title? The last 2 Dukes went on to become the monarch. Maybe bad luck for their elder brothers but rather good fortune (literally) for the dukes.

 

[Meraude]

What do you mean by bad luck regarding the York title? The last 2 Dukes went on to become the monarch. Maybe bad luck for their elder brothers but rather good fortune (literally) for the dukes.

Possibly due to the fact that with the exception of the first creation of a royal Duke of York (four Dukes, one of them from uncle to nephew), no Duke of York since have passed his title to a son, they have either become kings, not married or died young. Duke of York - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Emperor Roku XIV]

The succession portrayed in Hamlet is quite strange.

 

[Emperor Roku XIV]

Lumutqueen,

I believe you forgot Salic Law, by which female descendants are totally barred from succession. This was, for exemple, the case of the french monarchy.

I don't much like Salic Law, I think it should at least be possible for women to inherit the throne.

As I recall, the whole reason that the British monarch was often styled "King of France" without actually ruling France was due to a dispute over Salic Law.

 

[Emperor Roku XIV]

I think somebody has probably mentioned it on here before but, as of today, the commonwealth monarchy now has equal succession for both genders, this has been approved in all 16 countries with the monarch as their head of state.

 

[NGalitzine]

I think somebody has probably mentioned it on here before but, as of today, the commonwealth monarchy now has equal succession for both genders, this has been approved in all 16 countries with the monarch as their head of state.

Well they have approved the idea but it will still have to pass through the various national parliaments including Westminster. Nothing is law yet.

 

[Lenora]

Modern royal primogeniture: male versus female heirs

With the birth of Crown Princess's Victoria's baby girl, there is one more female heir to the throne.So, if we put the current reigning royal houses, the female primogeniture generally wins.Here I mean the future royals (as the equal law hasn't been adopted many years ago).But I wish to clarify some questions.
So, I believe all non-European reigning houses don't accept the female heirs. In this way, if I'm not mistaken , there are 10 European reigning monarchies, most of which have female heirs( and mainly equal primogeniture).
1.Britain ( we'll have to wait for the baby of Cambridges, but the equal law seems to be adopted);
2.Belgium ( female heir);
3.Denmark (male heir);
4.Holland (female heir);
5.Norway (female heir);
6.Sweden (female heir);
7.Spain ( I think Leonor will remain heir unless Letizia gives birth to a boy);
8.Monaco ( we'll have to wait);
9.Luxembourg ( we'll have to wait);
10.Liechtenstein ( here I have little knowledge).
In case of European houses I don't know the precise situation with Britain, Monaco and Lichtenstein. Has there been discussed or adopted the equal law?

 

[IloveCP]

I think Lichtenstein has a males only law but I am not sure.I think the same thing goes with Luxemberg.Correct me if I am wrong.

 

[titiromi]

In Monaco, Male primogeniture is the rule.

 

[American Dane]

I think Lichtenstein has a males only law but I am not sure.I think the same thing goes with Luxemberg.Correct me if I am wrong.

Luxembourg just recently went equal primogeniture -- so Princess Alexandra is now ahead of her younger brother Sebastian when previously she wasn't in line at all

 

[James VI]

Monaco

Did`nt the late Prince Rainier change the Monegasque constitution to allow female succession? I`m sure this was done, sometime at the turn of the century, when Prince Albert was still unmarried. Had he died without heirs, the Principality would have revereted to the French republic, hence the change in the constitution to allow the throne to pass to Princess Caroline and her children.

 

[titiromi]

Did`nt the late Prince Rainier change the Monegasque constitution to allow female succession? I`m sure this was done, sometime at the turn of the century, when Prince Albert was still unmarried. Had he died without heirs, the Principality would have revereted to the French republic, hence the change in the constitution to allow the throne to pass to Princess Caroline and her children.

Yes but Man outrank female so for it's male preference primogeniture

 

[James VI]

Monaco

Thank you for explaining that.

 

[Lumutqueen]

With the birth of Queen Victoria's baby girl, there is one more female heir to the throne.So, if we put the current reigning royal houses, the female primogeniture generally wins.Here I mean the future royals (as the equal law hasn't been adopted many years ago).But I wish to clarify some questions.
So, I believe all non-European reigning houses don't accept the female heirs. In this way, if I'm not mistaken , there are 10 European reigning monarchies, most of which have female heirs( and mainly equal primogeniture).
1.Britain ( we'll have to wait for the baby of Cambridges, but the equal law seems to be adopted);
2.Belgium ( female heir);
3.Denmark (male heir);
4.Holland (female heir);
5.Norway (female heir);
6.Sweden (female heir);
7.Spain ( I think Leonor will remain heir unless Letizia gives birth to a boy);
8.Monaco ( we'll have to wait);
9.Luxembourg ( we'll have to wait);
10.Liechtenstein ( here I have little knowledge).
In case of European houses I don't know the precise situation with Britain, Monaco and Lichtenstein. Has there been discussed or adopted the equal law?

First off, Queen Victoria? You mean Crown Princess. Equal Law in the UK has not been adopted only proposed and accepted by the 16 commonwealth nations. It will have to be written, examined and debated in 14 of the 16 countries and then pass through each parliament and receive Royal Assent this could take years and I doubt the governments are in any particular rush seeing as we have two Kings ready and waiting.

Also, just to point out Britain already has an heir for this generation of royals William. Charles fits into to the Victoria, Frederik, Haakon generation. A child of William's will be the first future heir for the next next generation.

 

[Next Star]

Yes but Man outrank female so for it's male preference primogeniture

No it is not male primogeninture if there was no females would be in line it is just primogeniture which the eldest son of the reigning monarch is the first in line to the throne.The only way a female would get it no males.

 

[elladora]

Well a female being allowed on the throne, is a great idea and could help like in the situation of Japan at the moment. The crownprince only has one daughter, but for some reason I have a male preference primogeniture. I have no idea why and I'm all for equal rights and yes I'm a woman. Perhaps because it had been the tradition in the past. But in my opinion if there are no men or he's unsuited the woman should take over.

Sorry but it's my preference for some reason. So I hope you can all understand that. Also I have no problem the way the things now are organised. Each country should do what is best for their own country and people.

 

[imojeen]

In Japan, Crown Prince has only one daughter and she is not in the line of the throne. Crown Prince's nephew is the only grandson of the King and he is in the 3rd line. I don't think they will change it because they have a male heir.

 

[imojeen]

And, what about Spain? Prince Felipe doesn't have a son. Is it needed?

 

[Grandduchess24]

Will it be changed? The princes have heiresses nor heirs like felipe, willem Alexander and naruhito.

 

[Lumutqueen]

Will it be changed? The princes have heiresses nor heirs like felipe, willem Alexander and naruhito.

In Japan, it's unlikely seeing as their is a male heir available and in such a traditional country there's no reason to change. The same goes for Spain but the other way round, there's no male heir and a girl being brought up as a future Queen.

As for The Netherlands it doesn't matter, the country has had equal primogenture since 1983.

 

[Artemisia]

And, what about Spain? Prince Felipe doesn't have a son. Is it needed?

Females can inherit the Throne, so unless Felipe and Letizia have a son, Leonor will one day become Queen Regnant of Spain.
If it transpires Letizia is pregnant with a boy, I am pretty certain equal primogeniture will be adopted very swiftly; back when Letizia was pregnant with her second daughter, they were quick to announce it was another girl to avoid unnecessary hassle.

As for Japan, the future of Japanese Monarchy effectively rests on the shoulders of a young boy because he is the only male (of his generation) within not only the Emperor's immediate, but also extended family. It is likely some changes will be adopted, possibly granting females right to inherit in total absence of male heirs among all dynasts.

 

[Esmerelda]

Liechtenstein is male-only succession I believe or they have a complicated system where if they run out of direct male line descendants, they find a male of the most senior female line of descent or something. I may have muddled that with the previous system in use in Luxembourg prior to the adoption of equal primogeniture.

I'm a pragmatist with regard to succession. The most important thing is the continuity of the institution and to a certain extent, who gets to be monarch has always been influenced by the circumstances in a country and the values of the time as well as the people's consent. In Europe, absolute primogeniture reflects how society has evolved. It's also interesting to note that countries which adopted equal primogeniture the earliest (Norway, Sweden, Belgium) previously had Salic Law (excepting the Netherlands). I assume this is also partially due to the shortage of heirs as well as foresight of where things are going in terms of gender equality. Denmark, which had male preference primogeniture only very recently changed the law. I understand that the UK and Spain don't see it as a political priority because of the legislative hassle it would cause when there are so many other things going on domestically and internationally.