The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #41  
Old 10-28-2011, 04:45 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Alexandria, United States
Posts: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by KittyAtlanta View Post
Hummm...there are lots of nobles in the succession. Or is everyone outside the Windsors disqualified?
Only descendants of Electress Sophia of Hanover are eligible for the Throne, as set down in the Act of Settlement 1701, and of course must meet other requirements (which will be adjusted soon to allow equal gender primogeniture and remove the restriction on marrying Roman Catholics).
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 10-28-2011, 05:22 PM
wbenson's Avatar
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lenora View Post
It's interesting to me to know something deeper on this law.If they've adopted the equal law,will this law apply to the British nobility as well?
No, it won't. This only affects succession to the throne. Succession to peerages is a different issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lenora View Post
As I know,Lord Mountbatten's title passed to his eldest daughter,as exception done in this way.
That was done as a special remainder to his two daughters. No other women are able to succeed to that earldom. (It will descend to the heirs male of the current Countess, then if they are exhausted to her sister Pamela and her heirs male.)
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 10-28-2011, 05:42 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 521
Quote:
Originally Posted by zembla View Post
It's certainly a victory for gender politics and religious ones as well, but I'm not a total fan. The media landscape has changed a lot since QEII took the throne. Any little girl today who would be destined to become Queen is going to face a lot of criticism from her looks to her behavior--looks, especially. She will not get the same pass her father did for youthful hijinks: clubbing, looking drunk in public, and any other sort of behavior that looks messy. I think for a girl, it won't be as easy on her psyche.
There's going to be an immense amount of focus on a daughter of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge whether she's the firstborn and heir or not. Especially if she's good looking and "glamorous." If anything, I think the tone of the attention focused on a future queen would be more positive as she would be the future head of state and therefore be seen as more than a decorative royal doll. Although I don't think this is just a gender issue - there's always been a difference in tone between the press coverage of Prince William and that of Prince Harry, for example.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 10-28-2011, 06:15 PM
wbenson's Avatar
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,259
First draft of Agreement in Principle among the Realms | chogm2011.org

The Prime Ministers of the sixteen Commonwealth nations of whom Her Majesty the Queen is Head of State have agreed during their meeting in Perth to work together towards a common approach to amending the rules on the succession to their respective Crowns. They will wish unanimously to advise The Queen of their views and seek her agreement.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 10-28-2011, 07:15 PM
MRSJ's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: ******, United States
Posts: 1,843
It'll be interesting to see if they have girl if shed became Princess of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall herself or what'll happen with that.....

As for the Queen's husband, nothing has to change in my opinion bc Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth ate perfect example of a husband beside a Queen....and isn't a King higher then a Queen and no one can be higher or not equal to monarch....?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 10-28-2011, 08:27 PM
PrincessKaimi's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hilo, Malibu, United States
Posts: 1,324
A King Consort role could be created (and, I believe, has been, in other monarchies) and defined as lower than the Queen Regnant. I don't see exactly why anyone would want to do that. Seems to me that a man willing to marry future Queen Willa/Catherine/Diana would have to be content with becoming a Prince.

The firstborn child of anyone so close to succession to the throne is likely to be brought up to be a responsible sort of person anyway, girl or boy. I'm not sure that girls' psyches are so nonresilient or troubled by public scrutiny. The various crown princesses and queens of other nations seem to get along all right. Queen Elizabeth has done more than just all right.

Lots of girls look to their fathers as examples of how to go about being the leader of a large business, as it's often men who accomplish those positions, and if the Cambridges have a girl first, she will grow up looking to her father as an example (and her mother will show her how to deal with being scrutinized, as a female, in public as by then she should be somewhat expert at it). Personally, I think Kate is doing just fine already.

By the time this infant becomes Queen (if she ever exists), she is (hopefully) going to be middle-aged. If Charles reigns until he's in his 90's, won't that make William in his late 50's/60's when he is crowned? This daughter, if she's born soon, will be in her late twenties or even 30 years old when she becomes Princess of Wales. Maybe even older. And she may well be 60 before she's Queen. Lots of time to learn the ropes.

In fact, it's rather amusing to suggest that a female would be less likely to learn how to do this than a male, I see absolutely no reason why that would be so.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 10-28-2011, 09:02 PM
Sherlock221B's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 174
What is the purpose of going through this political stunt and done when William and Catherine don't even have a child yet? IMHO The Monarchy is above the 'party politics' of Parliament. Male primogeniture is outdated, is it? In the last 100 years has an eldest daughter been superseded by a younger brother for the throne? If male primogeniture is so out dated, according to Mr. Cameron, then why legislation just for who inherits the throne why not every hereditary title? Proof of his political vanity. If "We need to get on and do it" why hasn't he done it in his family already? Why doesn't he insists his children use his wife's surname instead of his own? This is political theater. What damage to the throne has male primogeniture caused? Otherwise what is the need for the hurried change other than meaningless political posturing, a desire to look ‘modern’. This is a piece of political vanity for which future generations may pay a high price. Absolute primogeniture did not produce Queen Elizabeth I or Queen Anne or Queen Victoria or HM Queen Elizabeth II. This so called "out dated" method, male primogeniture, is responsible for these great queens.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 10-28-2011, 09:40 PM
Emperor Roku XIV's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Somewhere, Canada
Posts: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Elizabeth though was born as a member of the House of Windsor and so there would have been no change in 1952. Any change would take place with the accession of Charles - just as in 1901 Victoria was the last monarch of the House of Hannover and Edward VII became the first King of the House of Saxe-Coburgh Gotha. Same with Mary II who reigned as a member of the House of Stuart and not the House of Orange - although if they had had a child then the royal house would presumably have changed to Orange. Mary I reigned as a Tudor not a Hapsburg despite being married to one - but again if they had had a child then the royal house would have changed to Hapsburg.
Indeed, though Wikipedia lists Prince Charles as a Windsor, so I don't know what that means when he succeeds...
__________________
- Supreme Lord and Emperor of the Flood
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 10-28-2011, 10:25 PM
IloveCP's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: -, United States
Posts: 5,513
Well it's about time!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 10-28-2011, 11:05 PM
PrincessKaimi's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hilo, Malibu, United States
Posts: 1,324
It's much better, from a human perspective, to do it before the child is done and more mannerly, in my opinion.

And I'm totally confused about the transmission of this "House" thing - got into a discussion with another editor on Wikipedia about it recently. The woman stays her own House (whatever she was at birth, which she took from her father unless the mother is a queen regnant? What?) but her children are their father's house (unless the father is lower ranking than the mother? Is that it?)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 10-28-2011, 11:27 PM
Duchess of Darwin's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 212
This is great news!

It has potentially saved The British Monarchy from a very sudden decline in popularity, and it's a victory for Gender equality.

The lifting of the Catholic ban hasn't come a moment too soon either.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 10-28-2011, 11:41 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sandusky, United States
Posts: 120
I'm so happy that this "political stunt" is happening. It's way overdue!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 10-28-2011, 11:43 PM
wbenson's Avatar
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,259
PM welcomes proposal to amend rules governing the royal line of succession - Prime Minister of Canada

Prime Minister Stephen Harper today welcomed a proposal by David Cameron, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, to amend the rules governing the line of succession to the Throne.

The Government of Canada will continue to engage constructively with the other Realms regarding the details of the proposal and the method for its adoption.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 10-29-2011, 12:41 AM
Sherlock221B's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 174
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKaimi View Post
It's much better, from a human perspective, to do it before the child is done and more mannerly, in my opinion.
And what if William and Catherine's eldest child is a son, what would have been the purpose for going through all of these changes? One might say "You don't know if a son or a daughter will be born first." Exactly! At least wait and see and stop this political nonsense! Even if the oldest child is a daughter, what if their second child is a daughter as in the case of the last king. There's still no need to go through with this political pageantry, that is not even remotely relevant to the pressing issues concerning the UK today.


Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKaimi View Post
And I'm totally confused about the transmission of this "House" thing - got into a discussion with another editor on Wikipedia about it recently. The woman stays her own House (whatever she was at birth, which she took from her father unless the mother is a queen regnant? What?) but her children are their father's house (unless the father is lower ranking than the mother? Is that it?)
A wife usually joins the House of her husband whether her mother is queen regent or her father is king regent. She usually keeps her royal title. That is an aspect of male primogeniture. Will this dissolution legislation affect this? Who knows? It might. Did it harm the monarchy in the past in terms of gender discrimination. Well, let's see. Queen Victoria became a member of the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha as queen regent after she married Prince Albert despite beloning to the House of Hanover when she became queen regent. Her children were members of the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha despite Victoria being the queen regent and Albert only a prince consort. The monarchy as it exists today is of direct lineage of Queen Victoria's reign

...you decide
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 10-29-2011, 04:06 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,283
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherlock221B View Post
Women's liberation, that is what this is all about! This is at the top of Cameron's agenda?! THIS! What nonsense! What a maniacal waste of time. The Duke and Duchess do not even have a child yet. Victoria and Carl Philip were born before Sweden adopted absolute primogeniture. To do so on assumption is insane. What if William and Catherine's first born child is a son? This is a political stunt to regain popularity and why not include dukes, earls and barons?
A political stunt? Seriously? It's an outdated legislation that needed changing, it's been changed. It's not like Cameron has anything better to do at the moment while he's selling this country down the swanny. Do you think he's going to be more popular because he changed some royal law? Doubtful seeing has probably 95% don't actually understand it or won't know what it is.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 10-29-2011, 08:39 AM
Baroness of Books's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Bookstacks, United States
Posts: 5,772
Well done by the British government for instituting changes to keep up with the 21st century. The issue of peerage inheritance should be addressed as well, and may very well be in the future, but at least this is a good start.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 10-29-2011, 09:14 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 1,803
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baroness of Books View Post
The issue of peerage inheritance should be addressed as well, and may very well be in the future, but at least this is a good start.
As long as the Royal family (or better: the queen) does not start with that within their Royal peerages, I don't see any reason to change the system for the others. Most titles go back to times when the king/queen granted them as he or she thought it should be. At some times daughters could inherit, at other times this was out of the question. But that's how it is and it was indivually decided for each title. See eg the Mountbatten-title.
As the queen did not decide to introduce gender equality with the titles she bestowed on Andrew, Edward and William, even restricted the inheritance of them to the "heirs male", she obviously has no interest in changing anything in the aristocracy. And IMHO the relation souverain/peers is nothing a democratic government should tamper with. They either accept that as part of the British society or they end it but I don't think you can modernize it.

Of course the government could advise the queen to change the Letter Patents of peerages if the current holder of the title asks for it. So any current peer could himself decide how he and his family handle the inheritance of their peerage in the future. After all today not many estates are entailed, so they can already distribute the financial inheritance as they want. Why not be able to do the same with the title if the appeal to the souverain?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 10-29-2011, 10:40 AM
Sherlock221B's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 174
The most recent case of an elder sister being superseded by a younger brother is Victoria, Princess Royal, Empress of Germany, Queen of Prussia and Edward VII. Princess Victoria passed away the same year her mother Queen Victoria passed away. Had absolute primogeniture been applied to the monarchy at that time the Princess Royal's son Wilhelm, who was already Emperor of Germany and King of Prussia, would have become the King of the UK. Wilhelm II, Emperor of Germany, King of Prussia, King of the United Kingdom and British Dominions and Emperor of India...now that's a mouthful. Fascinating...there would've been no Edward VII, no George V, no Edward VIII, no George VI and no...oh my gosh...no HM Queen Elizabeth II! However, at that time male primogeniture was in place so upon the death of Queen Victoria her son Edward became king, the his son George V, his son Edward VIII, his brother George VI, his daughter...daughter? I thought male primogeniture discriminated against women becoming sovereign, what gives?

Whatever, it's important to resolve gender discrimination in the monarchy because it's the last remnant of gender discrimination in the Commonwealth. There's no more gender discrimination in the military...in the workplace...in the education system...male primogeniture in the monarchy is the last obstacle to total gender equality! Plus it casts a shade of nostalgia over the monarchy preventing the light of modernity of the 21st century. You know like horses and carriages, sentries posted outside palaces, ceremonial uniforms, parades created hundreds of years ago and all that other old stuff we've gotten rid of...what's that, we haven't got rid of that stuff yet. Come on! This is the 21st century what's taking them so long!

You know any type of primogeniture, gender or age, is discriminatory? Perhaps there ought to be an examination among the children of the monarch, along the lines of the old civil service exams? Or maybe set up an interview panel to see who would be the best candidate? Why not award the Crown to whoever got the best GCSE results? I mean the ultimate goal this dissolution legislation is neutrality right? Treating the monarchy as though it is just another public-sector job subject to anti-discrimination legislation is ludicrous. The obvious truth is that the whole concept of monarchy – with its, ancient traditions and customs and usages – is simply not logical in the modern business sense. Attempting to legislate it, rationally leads to absurdities

I am against almost all types of discrimination...gender, religious, disability, cultural, ageism (scratch that last one, it's irrelevant)...in almost any circumstance...housing, education, employment, military, medicine...but with the world in a cataclysmic economic meltdown, this Prime Minister has chosen to put forward this proposal that the presently Duke and Duchess' as-yet-unborn children should be allowed to marry Catholics without losing their right to the Throne, and should themselves inherit on the basis of age rather than gender. IMHO this is quite a deranged set of priorities for Mr. Cameron, quite apart from the inherent weakness of the arguments themselves?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 10-29-2011, 10:51 AM
Baroness of Books's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Bookstacks, United States
Posts: 5,772
The idea of the government allowing the current holder of a peerage to decide how to handle inheritance on an individual basis is certainly a sound idea. Naturally, it all depends on if the noble wishes to adhere to the traditional method of primogeniture or decides to go with the flow, in a manner of speaking, with equal status. It would be good to introduce such flexibility in the system, although it might end up a big headache for the peer if any daughter pesters him for equal rights if she has a younger brother!

So in this scenario of peer equal primogeniture, would a title now be inherited by a daughter rather than passing to the nearest male relative if she's the only child? Would it still die out? I'm a bit unclear about this.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 10-29-2011, 01:55 PM
Tiggersk8's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Evansville, Canada
Posts: 1,527
I cheered when I heard this news yesterday. About time is right!!

And I don't think we should compare HM's upbringing/childhood/teenage years w/those of today. Not only was it a different time, but she was also a child of WWII. Going through something like that can certainly speed up a child's maturity.

Just something to keep in mind... :o)
__________________

__________________
Recycle Life ~ Be An Organ Donor!!
Recieved my Kidney Transplant on December 10th, 1993 and will be forever grateful to the family of my donor for the greatest earliest Christmas Present I've ever been given
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Act of Settlement 1701 and the Line of Succession Elise,LadyofLancaster British Royals 941 02-24-2015 06:31 PM
Prince Frederik and Princess Mary's Official Visit to Australia: November 19-26, 2011 Princess Robijn Crown Prince Frederik and Crown Princess Mary and Family 295 08-28-2014 08:34 PM
The Change of the Act of Succession - 1979 Constitution Change GrandDuchess Royal House of Sweden 276 06-30-2014 12:52 AM
Prince Frederik and Princess Mary's Official Visit to Brazil: September 16-21, 2012 ricarda Crown Prince Frederik and Crown Princess Mary and Family 81 10-05-2012 04:15 PM
The Third Succession Act (Henry VIII, 1543) Daz_Voz British Royal History 4 07-25-2012 03:17 PM




Popular Tags
abdication belgium brussels carl philip charlene crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events death fashion germany grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta leonor infanta sofia jordan king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander letizia luxembourg nobility norway royals official visit ottoman poland president gauck president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince daniel prince floris princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess claire princess haya princess madeleine princess margriet princess mary princess mette-marit princess of asturias queen fabiola queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sonja royal royal fashion sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague visit wedding



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:04 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2015
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]