Succession Issues

[Lillia]

he is named Shinzo Abe.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...8KCG4FO0.shtml

http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/index-e.html

[UserDane]

Originally Posted by Furienna

Well, it can only happen, if the children have their mother's last name instead of their father's. But I have yet to see any royal children having their mother's last name, even if the mother is a queen. I'm not saying, that a woman's heirs aren't as good as a man's heirs. But if there's a man avaible to carry a dynasty further, I don't think a woman should have the thrown. For example, it just feels weird, that Victoria's children will have the Swedish thrown one day, so that the Bernadotte dynasty will be pushed away, when we have Carl Philip.

Let me state just for the record how strongly I disagree with your views that 'if there's a man available....' - it makes me feel very uncomfortable I must admit. I look forward to seing a queen Victoria in Sweden, still hope for an empress Aiko in Japan, cross my fingers for a queen Leonor in Spain - and - although I adore wee prince Christian - had hoped fervently for a princess!

By the way, it's news to me that eg. Frederik and Joachim are now referred to as Montepezeats and not Glücksburgs

[Next Star]

Originally Posted by Furienna

But Elizabeth II's descendants will be Mountbatten-Windsors, not pure Windsors, Queen Margareth II's descendants will be Lamborde de Monpezats, not Oldenburg-Glückburgs, and the Netherlands have had three different dynasties on the thrown the last century. These queens have produced heirs, and I'm sure they all do a good job, but they can't carry on their family line/dynasty.

Okay you say that none of their descents carry their names your wrong they do have part of their names for example Queen Elizabeth II 's descents are Mountabatten-Windors. They may not be full Windsors but they still have apart of the Queen's name. I still think that female can carry a family line without their husbands' names even being included.

[Emily]

Originally Posted by Lillia

he is named Shinzo Abe.

And an AP report today says "Off to a fast start in setting up his cabinet, Abe stocked the new government with conservatives on every issue from the economy and foreign affairs to defense and women's rights. Even his minister in charge of gender issues, Sanae Takaichi, is known for her right-leaning outlook. She's against a dual-surname proposal that would let married women keep their maiden names."

Where does this leave the succession issue? Not sounding too good, IMO.

[BMC]

Originally Posted by Emily

And an AP report today says "Off to a fast start in setting up his cabinet, Abe stocked the new government with conservatives on every issue from the economy and foreign affairs to defense and women's rights. Even his minister in charge of gender issues, Sanae Takaichi, is known for her right-leaning outlook. She's against a dual-surname proposal that would let married women keep their maiden names."

Where does this leave the succession issue? Not sounding too good, IMO.

I think with the birth of the new little Prince, the succession issue will not be revisted until he marries. The IHA has gotten its male heir, so the succession is secured for one more generation at least. Bummer

[Furienna]

Originally Posted by UserDane

Let me state just for the record how strongly I disagree with your views that 'if there's a man available....' - it makes me feel very uncomfortable I must admit. I look forward to seing a queen Victoria in Sweden, still hope for an empress Aiko in Japan, cross my fingers for a queen Leonor in Spain - and - although I adore wee prince Christian - had hoped fervently for a princess!

By the way, it's news to me that eg. Frederik and Joachim are now referred to as Montepezeats and not Glücksburgs

Do you know what make me feel very uncomfortable? That you seem to hate men. You come across as if you don't want a male monarch anywhere!

And when has Frederik and Joachim been called Oldenburg-Glücksburgs? They're Lamborde de Montepezats.

[Elspeth]

This thread is about the Japanese royal family, not the European ones. Please could we get back on topic. Thanks.

Elspeth

Japan moderator

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by Furienna

Well, it can only happen, if the children have their mother's last name instead of their father's. But I have yet to see any royal children having their mother's last name, even if the mother is a queen. I'm not saying, that a woman's heirs aren't as good as a man's heirs. But if there's a man avaible to carry a dynasty further, I don't think a woman should have the thrown. For example, it just feels weird, that Victoria's children will have the Swedish thrown one day, so that the Bernadotte dynasty will be pushed away, when we have Carl Philip.

Is it so difficult to accept that different countries have different laws and that these laws are not written in stone for all eternity but can be changed if the appropriate body decides that it's time for a change? I'm afraid Furienna, even though you're from Sweden, you don't represent the Swedes and thus it's not your right to decide what will happen in Sweden. You don't represent Japan either so while it's your right to state your opinion and there is a good chance that many Japanese voters agree with you, that's not proof of the fact that you're right.

AFAIK the Japanese Imperial family has no family name, so the next in line doesn't bear either father's or mother's family name. He is just in line because that's how the law in Japan works and if they change the law, then the heir probably keeps his place in the succession but it could happen that he looses it. That's legal then and we all who are interested in royality should accept that, even if we believe that the law might be wrong. But that's the way it is.

[Next Star]

That's sad Japan has all of those female descents and none of them are included in the line of succession why? Can't they change the law and allow both a female emperor or male emperor there are two ways they could do this by primogeniture going by the eldest male descent of the monarch the male descents would still have a stronger claim to the throne than female descents because they only way a female would inherit the throne if no legitmate male descents or cognatic primogeniture meaning the eldest child would be the heir to the throne regardlees of sex.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by Next Star

? Can't they change the law and allow both a female emperor or male emperor

Yes, they can change the law - I just read that the new prime minister plans to change parts of the constitution of 1946, so it's obviously possible. Will they do it? probably not as the Japanese view the world in a different way from us and probably don't see now the need to change the rules of succession. But if the new prime minister is so ultra-conservative as was stated here and in the online papers, then maybe he will take the step to reinclude all those Imperial princes who have been kicked from the line of succession in 1946. Thus, they won't need to go via the female line because they have enough mal heirs and could even marry their princesses to princes, so their marriage could strenghen the bloodline. Who knows?

[Lillia]

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine

Yes, they can change the law - I just read that the new prime minister plans to change parts of the constitution of 1946, so it's obviously possible. Will they do it? probably not as the Japanese view the world in a different way from us and probably don't see now the need to change the rules of succession. But if the new prime minister is so ultra-conservative as was stated here and in the online papers, then maybe he will take the step to reinclude all those Imperial princes who have been kicked from the line of succession in 1946. Thus, they won't need to go via the female line because they have enough mal heirs and could even marry their princesses to princes, so their marriage could strenghen the bloodline. Who knows?

I agree with most of your point. it is well said, Jo.

IMO, it is always useful to at least discuss how an institution can be changed for the better.

Institutions and the traditions bind them are created and upheld by people. If people are (please pardon the expression) harmed by certain parts of the institution, then change is useful. Again, that is just my humble opinion. Change does not mean that anyone despises the way that things are done or the complete end of anything special.

It also amazes me how sometimes women themselves are the ones who will fight the hardest against the very idea of changes taking place that could make a positive impact in the distant future. We're just speculating about what could occur, and that could have some very positive long term impact for women in Japan. I still am amazed that any woman would be so narrow minded and limited in their thinking (imo) that they are completely repelled on the suggestion of a woman on the throne anywhere and actually accuse others of hating men for supporting it. Bizzare, imo.

Anyway, not that anything like a reform of the IHA's position would ever happen in the next 75-100 years. It is an internal matter for Japan to decide.

IMO, if they did change that rule about how the princesses names are taken from the records (I think that's what it is) and the one about succession of women to the throne, it's just a tiny step but what a good positive signal it would sent to the daughters of Japan about how important and how valuable and capable they are! I don't think any man in Japan should or would ever feel threatened about it in any way (it's not that they are, I do not know).

But now I have a question: what is this thing about Imperial Princes being excluded from the royal line of succession in 1946?

Could someone please explain that further?

[monica17]

Originally Posted by Lillia

But now I have a question: what is this thing about Imperial Princes being excluded from the royal line of succession in 1946?
Could someone please explain that further?

I think it had something to do with the collateral branches of the Imperial Family reduced to commoners. In the past, should the main branch fail to have a legitimate heir, the succession can be passed on to other branches of the family. There were 11-or was it 9?-branches of the family before WW II who could provide for a heir, in addition to the main one. These branches were called princely houses, I think, and the males were all princes, no matter how distant their relation from the emperor. And should a branch lack heirs, then it can be taken over by a relative (as directed by the emperor), who will continue that line.

[mandyy]

Abe's close ally says imperial law should be revised in time
Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Hakubun Shimomura, a close ally of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, said Saturday an imperial law should be revised "not so far in the future" to ensure a stable male-line succession of emperors.
"The tradition of male-line succession will not be safe without revising a law just because Prince Hisahito has been born," Shimomura said at a rally in Tokyo celebrating the prince's birth in early September. "We are now in an important period when we must begin thinking about law revision in parliament not so far in the future," he added.................
http://asia.news.yahoo.com/060930/kyodo/d8kf3m3g0.html

[Skydragon]

Oh dear, one step forward, two steps back! Japan is so modern in some things (electronics etc) and so 'old fashioned' in others.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Oh dear, one step forward, two steps back! Japan is so modern in some things (electronics etc) and so 'old fashioned' in others.

At least they are doing something! If the Japanese believe that their emperor should be a direct descendent via the male line from a former emperor, why not elevate all men whose bloodlines comes via the male line from an emperor to princes again? Thus, there is a chance that princesses Aiko, Mako and Kako can find a suitable husband according to tradition.

I believe they must do something and fast to keep the Imperial family founded in the conscience of their people and to enlarge the Imperial family is a sure way to do it. Just think of all the interesting events that will happen once there are more princes and, of course, princesses. There will be discussions about a suitable civil listfor each of them (billed by the taxpayer, of course!), there will be news reports about their conduct, their weddings, marriages, divorces, deaths, funerals....

I'm convinced that this view into a possible future alone might get some not so conservative politicians to start thinking again... Because re-introducing ex-princes back into the public eye may well cost the conservatives a lot of votes. Japan's economy is not what it used to be and a lot of people are thinking about how to spent the money from a potential sale of the Imperial palace. Enlarge the Imperial family and you'll open Pandora's box for the government. Well, that's their problem.

[Toledo]

I'm checking out several news wires that just came out during the past few hours related to royalty. This one is from Japan's succesion story:

72 percent support female emperor: Mainichi poll
Mainici Interactive News
September 30, 2006

[Elspeth]

I strongly suspect that whatever happens - whether they decide to allow females or whether they reinstate the minor branches to royal rank or even if they decide to let princesses remain royal after marriage - it'll be done too late to make any difference to Aiko. Naruhito was a bad boy and criticised the Pooh Bahs in public, and I think his reward will be to see his branch of the family sidelined as far as possible. But we'll see.