The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   Royal House of Sweden (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f22/)
-   -   Swedish Line of Succession (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f22/swedish-line-of-succession-12487.html)

Next Star 04-02-2007 02:18 PM

Swedish Line of Succession
 
I guess Sweden is going to stay old fashioned heir must produce heir.But what if the heir does not want to get married or have a child then what will they do? I am not staying that Victoria does not want to get married and produce a heir.I just speaking in general that is why ? I had wrote that idea out.Not every one wants to marry and have children that is why? You have to seek more options.

Henri M. 04-04-2007 02:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Next Star
I guess Sweden is going to stay old fashioned heir must produce heir.

If Sweden has remained the 'oldfashioned' way, then not Victoria but her younger brother Carl-Philip would still have been the Crown Prince. Your starting point seems to forget that Sweden has not remained oldfashioned at all, but was the very first counrty to make the succession to make it 'gender free' (and to take away all political influence of the King).

At the cost of Crown Prince Carl-Philip and in favour of his sister Princess Victoria, that was, back then.

:flowers:

By the way: in no any monarchy there is a rule 'heir must produce heir'. And it also never has existed.

Next Star 04-05-2007 10:43 AM

I disaree whole heartily with your statement Herni M.From what have seen and hear the heir must produce a heir. That is what I mean about being old fashion regardless who the heir to the throne is male or female. If it never existed then why almost every heir as a heir not putting the burden on a sister or brother? From what seen this claim is true my opinion is different from yours.

Henri M. 04-05-2007 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Next Star
I disaree whole heartily with your statement Herni M.From what have seen and hear the heir must produce a heir. That is what I mean about being old fashion regardless who the heir to the throne is male or female. If it never existed then why almost every heir as a heir not putting the burden on a sister or brother? From what seen this claim is true my opinion is different from yours.

"Ideally" a heir gives birth to a heir. See Japan (Masako) or see Belgium (Fabiola). This often to the bitterness of the ladies, painted down as 'tragic and infertile'. But there is no any document that there 'should' be a heir by a heir. Japan is the best example: now suddenly a younger brother to the Crown Prince has become father of a son, all pressure on Masako for a heir has disappeared like snow for the sun.

George IV had no heir and was succeeded by his brother the Duke of Clarence.

William IV had no heir and was succeeded by his niece Princess Victoria of Kent.

King Edward VIII had no heir when he abdicated and left the throne to his brother the Duke of York.

King Willem III, Grand Duke of Luxembourg had no heir and left the Grand Duchy to his cousin the Duke of Nassau.

King Leopold II of the Belgians had no heir and left the throne to his nephew the Count of Flanders.

King Boudouin of the Belgians had no heir and left the throne to his brother the Prince of Liège.

bekalc 04-05-2007 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henri M.
"Ideally" a heir gives birth to a heir. See Japan (Masako) or see Belgium (Fabiola). This often to the bitterness of the ladies, painted down as 'tragic and infertile'. But there is no any document that there 'should' be a heir by a heir. Japan is the best example: now suddenly a younger brother to the Crown Prince has become father of a son, all pressure on Masako for a heir has disappeared like snow for the sun.

George IV had no heir and was succeeded by his brother the Duke of Clarence.

William IV had no heir and was succeeded by his niece Princess Victoria of Kent.

King Edward VIII had no heir when he abdicated and left the throne to his brother the Duke of York.

King Willem III, Grand Duke of Luxembourg had no heir and left the Grand Duchy to his cousin the Duke of Nassau.

King Leopold II of the Belgians had no heir and left the throne to his nephew the Count of Flanders.

King Boudouin of the Belgians had no heir and left the throne to his brother the Prince of Liège.

Yes, but there's a difference between people who try and fail to have an heir, and people who don't try as well. While not everyone, a lot of those people tried to sire an heir.

And not having a direct heir can cause some real issues. Normally, one hopes that the kid will be raised from birth as the future heir, but well if they aren't the direct heir one never knows because things can change. For example, in Japan especially the boys are trained from a young age, to be the future heir. But with Hisahito it's going to be very hard to do so.

Frankly, it is Victoria's responsiblity to marry and attempt to have an heir. And it is more her responsibility than her siblings.

Henri M. 04-05-2007 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bekalc
Frankly, it is Victoria's responsiblity to marry and attempt to have an heir. And it is more her responsibility than her siblings.

What an absurd statement.
King Baudouin for years was an unmarried King. In the Sixties he finally married Doña Fabiola de Mora y Aragón, daughter of the Marquess de Casa Riera, and Count de Mora. Their marriage bore no fruit. So King Baudouin's 41 year's Reign is now overshadowed by the fact that he had not fathered a Prince or Princess? Come on....

The only responsibility the King had was to maintain and to uphold the Constitution and all the rights of the Belgians. That was what he solemnly pledged. No more, no less.

The Prince of Monaco also still is not married and has no 'own' Heirs. So what? It is perfectly settled that his sister the Princess of Hannover is second in line after him.

bekalc 04-05-2007 11:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henri M.
What an absurd statement.
King Baudouin for years was an unmarried King. In the Sixties he finally married Doña Fabiola de Mora y Aragón, daughter of the Marquess de Casa Riera, and Count de Mora. Their marriage bore no fruit. So King Baudouin's 41 year's Reign is now overshadowed by the fact that he had not fathered a Prince or Princess? Come on....

The only responsibility the King had was to maintain and to uphold the Constitution and all the rights of the Belgians. That was what he solemnly pledged. No more, no less.

The Prince of Monaco also still is not married and has no 'own' Heirs. So what? It is perfectly settled that his sister the Princess of Hannover is second in line after him.

If there is no heir, or there is no heir appropriately prepared, then the there can be problems when it comes time for the next person to rule..The next heir's preperation etc. .In the case of Monaco there is actually a lot of uncertainity. It doesn't seem like Andrea who would succeed Caroline is really being prepared for rule. And then there is the issue of all of Albert's illegitimate kids, technically he could maybe change the constitution and bring everything up in the air. Then, what happens if Albert does marry and has a legitimate heir...? There is nothing settled clearly in Monaco. Unlike in Sweden, where Victoria knows she'll take over and has been clearly prepared since she's a little girl.

I never said that a king/queen failed if they didn't have an heir. Sometimes there can be good reasons not to have a marriage in a king/Queen's case.. Or, sometimes a king/queen could be infertility. The King of Belgian did try to have an heir, its quite clear. It's just an heir didn't materalize. But as I mentioned before, there is a big difference between trying to have an heir, and well not trying at all.

Most monarchs will tell you that it is part of their job to secure heirs for the future. Or to at least try to.

Next Star 04-12-2007 11:37 AM

First of all I am talking about current heirs not those who are deceased no offense to them but I know about the situation and how some royals try to concieve and have a heir but they can not.Now Monaco's situation is totally diifferent the reigning prince who we know as Albert II is not married nor does have a legitmate heir. It is his fault and no one elses being he does not to settle down and try to find a wife and see if he is able to produce a legitmate heir.Now back to Victoria she still has enough time to wed a try to prouce a heir without going through her brother or sister succeeding her as king or queen to their kingdom.

Henri M. 04-12-2007 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Next Star
Now Monaco's situation is totally diifferent the reigning prince who we know as Albert II is not married nor does have a legitmate heir.

Of course the Prince of Monaco has a perfectly legitimate Heir and that is Her Royal Highness Caroline Louise Marguerite Princess of Hannover, Princess of Great Britain and Ireland, Duchess of Braunschweig-Lüneburg née Princess de Monaco.

:flowers:

And of course Crown Princess Victoria already has a prefectly legitimate Heir and that is His Royal Highness Carl Philip Edmund Bertil Prince of Sweden, Duke of Värmland.

:flowers:

You see cows on the road while there are no cows at all. It are not Prince Albert or Crown Princess Victoria who determine the line of succession, it is just the dry factual Constitution which already determines who are in line of succession. And if Albert and Victoria remain childless, so be it. The Constitution does not care about that.

Next Star 04-16-2007 01:14 PM

I am talking about the head of state or heir having a child as their heir not a brother or sister.No offense but Caroline nor Carl-Philp should have to be future heads of state because their brother or sister has not wed or had a legtimate child as their heir.This puts a lot of pressure on them and the rest of their families to step up and one day be future leaders.Like I am mention in my previous quote all the other heirs have taken the pressure and burdens of their siblings by getting married and having a child as their heir and not a sister or brother like Albert or Victoria. I think Victoria will not be like Albert hopefully in the next two or three years Victoria will wed and I Albert will not.

bekalc 04-18-2007 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henri M.
Of course the Prince of Monaco has a perfectly legitimate Heir and that is Her Royal Highness Caroline Louise Marguerite Princess of Hannover, Princess of Great Britain and Ireland, Duchess of Braunschweig-Lüneburg née Princess de Monaco.

:flowers:

And of course Crown Princess Victoria already has a prefectly legitimate Heir and that is His Royal Highness Carl Philip Edmund Bertil Prince of Sweden, Duke of Värmland.

:flowers:

You see cows on the road while there are no cows at all. It are not Prince Albert or Crown Princess Victoria who determine the line of succession, it is just the dry factual Constitution which already determines who are in line of succession. And if Albert and Victoria remain childless, so be it. The Constitution does not care about that.

I never said that the Crown of Sweden or Monoco will end if Victoria and Albert remain unmarried did I?

What I said is that it makes things uncertain because if Victoria and Albert do have children that means Caroline and Carl Phillipe are no longer the heirs.

If you think about it means that Caroline's life for example is on hold as is her children. They need to be prepared to take over throne, but well don't want to be to prepared because what if a legitimate kid comes.
It's not necessarily the same for Carl Phillipe because female fertility is well less done now. But what if Victoria decides to have a kid from invitro at 50. Carl Phillipe could already be married by then and preparing his children for the well eventually succession and then bomb. That's why it can be fairly selfish for the monarch to hold off like that. I"m not saying you should marry to marry...
But if a legitimate kid comes, than that's virtual certainty.

Lena 04-18-2007 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bekalc
But what if Victoria decides to have a kid from invitro at 50. Carl Phillipe could already be married by then and preparing his children for the well eventually succession and then bomb.


Now that would be an most interesting case. To get that done, she could either be in the lucky position of still having eggs resulting in a healthy baby. Or she would use a frozen egg (and then Carl Philip and his children could know about her plan) or she would get an egg of a donator. But would the baby be then her offspring, and the one, who is first/second in line to the throne. Complicated question, that would make the modern world and old traditions clashing in an most interesting way :wacko: Then again these days all Royals seem to live with the motto "I´m creating my own rules"...so maybe Victoria could then adopt the baby, she has self carried. Or it would be declared automatically to her baby, because 200 years ago, they had no genetic tests either :wacko:

Well, all grey theory...Miss "I love children & animal" would better reproduce yourself. Nearly 50 year old prince Albert is already enough of a "desperate figure", but an 50 year old crown princess or queen having decided to live alone and/or not having children is it even more...talking about double standards here. :rolleyes:

bekalc 04-18-2007 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lena
Now that would be an most interesting case. To get that done, she could either be in the lucky position of still having eggs resulting in a healthy baby. Or she would use a frozen egg (and then Carl Philip and his children could know about her plan) or she would get an egg of a donator. But would the baby be then her offspring, and the one, who is first/second in line to the throne. Complicated question, that would make the modern world and old traditions clashing in an most interesting way :wacko: Then again these days all Royals seem to live with the motto "I´m creating my own rules"...so maybe Victoria could then adopt the baby, she has self carried. Or it would be declared automatically to her baby, because 200 years ago, they had no genetic tests either :wacko:

Well, all grey theory...Miss "I love children & animal" would better reproduce yourself. Nearly 50 year old prince Albert is already enough of a "desperate figure", but an 50 year old crown princess or queen having decided to live alone and/or not having children is it even more...talking about double standards here. :rolleyes:

Who knows what would happen. I have a feeling though Victoria is an honest person, and would admit that it wasn't her egg. And if it wasn't her egg, then I don't think the baby should count in the succession because its not of her blood/dna even if she carried the baby.

Furienna 04-18-2007 07:48 PM

I just wish one of three siblings can produce an heir soon.

Marengo 04-19-2007 05:37 AM

Well, not to soon, 9 months after a marriage and not 1 day sooner ;)

ZandraRae 04-20-2007 08:44 AM

Right on Marengo! All we need is a scandal with one of the three siblings having an illegitmate child out of wedlock. Carl Gustav would have a heart attack. Let's wait. All other CP's are in their 30's, Victoria still has time.

Furienna 04-21-2007 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZandraRae
Right on Marengo! All we need is a scandal with one of the three siblings having an illegitmate child out of wedlock. Carl Gustav would have a heart attack. Let's wait. All other CP's are in their 30's, Victoria still has time.

But Sweden is a liberal country though, when it comes to this issue. During the last five decades, the status of the illegitimate have increased. I don't even think a royal having an illegitimate would raise too many eyebrows anymore.

Zonk 04-21-2007 07:35 PM

Swedish Line of Succession
 
Please note that several posts from the Act of Succession - 1979 Consitutional thread have been moved here. The purpose of this thread is to discuss the Swedish Line of Succession. Any posts relating who succeeds Victoria if she has no children, etc should been posted here.

Current order of succession
  1. Crown Princess Victoria, Duchess of Västergötland
  2. Prince Carl Philip, Duke of Värmland
  3. Princess Madeleine, Duchess of Hälsingland and Gästrikland
Have fun posting!

Hans-Rickard 04-25-2007 01:42 PM

If Victoria have no children when she is the new swedish monarch it will be an very unlycky situation but dont worry, it will never happen!

If Victoria is over 40 years old and proclaimed Queen Victoria I The Queen of Sweden and that whitout having an own heir Prince Carl Philip will take over as Crownprince and we have the same situation as in monaco.
But I think this situation will re-open the general-discussion about a republic constitution, the same discussion who was discussed under Gustaf VI Adolfs final years and under the beginning of Carl XVI Gustafs period.

Lets pray for that this situation never came back!

Next Star 04-25-2007 01:55 PM

Hans-Rickard there is no way Carl-Philp would become Crown Prince even if Victoria does not wed and has no children.He will just be prince and heir presumptive and not heir apparent there is a difference between these two terms. An heir apparent can not be removed by the birth of others that is what Victoria is now they only to remove that right is the by the law meaning the consititution has to be changed in over for someone else to proceed over the line and be first and heir the throne as she is.Heir presumptive is a person
who can be removed by the birth of other meaning as long as there is no other person who has a stronger claim to the throne they will inherit the throne.

magnik 04-25-2007 02:38 PM

Since 5 February 1818:
http://members.fortunecity.com/succe...es/sweden.html

Hans-Rickard 04-25-2007 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Next Star
Hans-Rickard there is no way Carl-Philp would become Crown Prince even if Victoria does not wed and has no children.He will just be prince and heir presumptive and not heir apparent there is a difference between these two terms. An heir apparent can not be removed by the birth of others that is what Victoria is now they only to remove that right is the by the law meaning the consititution has to be changed in over for someone else to proceed over the line and be first and heir the throne as she is.Heir presumptive is a person
who can be removed by the birth of other meaning as long as there is no other person who has a stronger claim to the throne they will inherit the throne.

I know the difference between a heir apparent and a heir presumptive and you are right, Carl Philip will be styled as a prince heir presumptive in that unlucky scenario. What I ment was that he will tecnically be a crownprince
and be called as that, just like Prince Bertil was heir presumptive in 6 years but people called him crownprince even though he was a prince.

Next Star 04-26-2007 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hans-Rickard
I know the difference between a heir apparent and a heir presumptive and you are right, Carl Philip will be styled as a prince heir presumptive in that unlucky scenario. What I ment was that he will tecnically be a crownprince
and be called as that, just like Prince Bertil was heir presumptive in 6 years but people called him crownprince even though he was a prince.

I understand that Carl-Philp would callled crown prince but in reality that is totally inproper way when referering to someone who is heir presumptive and not heir apparent.Yes he was heir apparent a short time at his birth and that had been changed and how he is second in line to the throne. Using the proper terms helps those who do not know nothing about royalty all members of this forums knows something about royalty so we can not get confuse.

Karisma 12-18-2010 05:03 PM

Princess Birgitta is the 4 th in susccession
 
The Succession constitution, SO, is the oldest existing constitution in Sweden. It was passed by Parliament in 1810, and was issued as the current September 26 that year. The law governing the succession to the Swedish throne, that is, who gets to be king or queen reigning in the kingdom. With the adoption of succession, became the House of Bernadotte eligible to ascend the throne of Sweden.

The Swedish successin to the throne is currently as follows:
1.Crownprincess Victoria
2.Prins Carl Philip
3.Princess Madeleine
4.Princess Birgitta (and her family) *

Succession statutes to the Swedish royal dignity is inherited in the Bernadotte dynasty, previously available only to male offspring, but since 1980, although the female offspring.¨

This constitution replaced the earlier order of succession, and was introduced precisely to regulate the succession order that would apply in Sweden after the election of Jean Baptiste Bernadotte to the Swedish crown prince. It therefore understands him, when the statute which has been the succession to the throne of Sweden. With the changes in 1980, instead saying it succession based on the current king, Carl XVI Gustaf, paying attention, therefore, has cut off the possibility for all other branches of the Bernadotte dynasty to claim any inheritance to the throne, even if they come from someone who in his time was born as heir apparent. This change was made to prevent a whole new group of female descendants of King Karl XIV Johan, who were previously excluded from the throne, could claim the succession to the Swedish throne. .They did not want to deprive the king's uncle Prince Bertil his succession to the throne (not the least of the reasons it was convenient to have an adult heir who could stand in for the king while his children were still minors), a special transition rule that gave Prince Bertil of succession to the throne after King Carl XVI Gustaf relativs. .This transition rule became obsolete when Prince Bertil died 1997th.

The order of succession prescribed in addition to succession may also be provisions to beliefs and marriage for members of the Swedish royal family and a prohibition on unauthorized become ruler of a foreign state.

A member of the royal family must be of the Lutheran faith as the unchanged Augsburg Confession by the year 1593 otherwise the right to forfeit the throne. This applies both to the monarch as princes and princesses. In the case of succession marriage rules are not bound by the monarch but can marry whomever he or she wants. A prince or princess must however have the monarch's approval and even the government's approval to marry without losing their entitlement to the throne. There is no obstacle to a prince or princess to marry whoever they want - but the succession to the throne will be lost if not the monarch and the government has given its permission.

A member of the royal family may not, without the monarch and Parliament's consent to become ruler of a foreign state, whether it be through inheritance, marriage or choice. The member of the royal family that will lose the right to the crown for himself and his posterity.

The Swedish throne
Succession Clause a statute:

"§ 1. Succession Law to the Swedish throne to be male and female descendants of the Crown Prince Johan Baptist Julii, later King Karl XIV Johan's, issue in descendant, King Carl XVI Gustaf. Older siblings and older siblings 'descendants have precedence over younger siblings and younger siblings' descendants. "
(Law-act 1979:935)

* The only one of King Carl XVI Gustaf siblings who married King Gusav the VI th Adolf state, and the Swedish Government, is Princess Birgitta of marriage to Prince Johann Georg of Hohenzollern. Most likely would Princess Birgitta and her family be asked in the event of a disaster and the whole of the current Royal family wiped out.

lilnana 12-18-2010 10:06 PM

I was under the impression that in the 70's there was some sort of reform that narrowed the regents role to just ceremonial (opposed to his grandfather), and also limited the session to just the current descendants. An addition, the kings sisters were never in line to begin with because it was limited to just men.

nascarlucy 12-18-2010 10:29 PM

I have an interesting question to this. If Princess Madeline had children before Prince Carl, would her or her children be put ahead of him in succession?

4Pam 12-18-2010 11:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nascarlucy (Post 1177676)
I have an interesting question to this. If Princess Madeline had children before Prince Carl, would her or her children be put ahead of him in succession?

No. Carl- Phillip's position will remain. He was the second born and Madeline was the third. Madeline's children will come after her. Madeline having children before her brother will not elevate her place in line. It will always be Victoria, Carl-Philip then Madeline.

mattep74 12-19-2010 02:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Karisma (Post 1177583)
The Succession constitution, SO, is the oldest existing constitution in Sweden. It was passed by Parliament in 1810, and was issued as the current September 26 that year. The law governing the succession to the Swedish throne, that is, who gets to be king or queen reigning in the kingdom. With the adoption of succession, became the House of Bernadotte eligible to ascend the throne of Sweden.

The Swedish successin to the throne is currently as follows:
1.Crownprincess Victoria
2.Prins Carl Philip
3.Princess Madeleine
4.Princess Birgitta (and her family) *

You have it wrong. When the successionorder was changed in the 70ths it was stipulated that the only ones that could inherit the throne had to be descendand from Carl XVI Gustav. Birgitta is NOT in the successionorder.

In Sweden the only ones that are seen as royals are in fact the family of Carl XVI Gustav. His sisters and uncle with families arent seen as the extended royal family, "just" normal citizens

Stefan 12-19-2010 03:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lilnana (Post 1177666)
I was under the impression that in the 70's there was some sort of reform that narrowed the regents role to just ceremonial (opposed to his grandfather), and also limited the session to just the current descendants. An addition, the kings sisters were never in line to begin with because it was limited to just men.

Yes this was when the new Costitution came in force in 1974. The succession law was changed later and came in force on 01.01.1980.

mattep74 12-19-2010 04:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Karisma (Post 1177583)

* The only one of King Carl XVI Gustaf siblings who married King Gusav the VI th Adolf state, and the Swedish Government, is Princess Birgitta of marriage to Prince Johann Georg of Hohenzollern. Most likely would Princess Birgitta and her family be asked in the event of a disaster and the whole of the current Royal family wiped out.

I didnt see what you wrote in the end. Most likely if such an event happened then Sweden would abolish the monarchy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nascarlucy (Post 1177676)
I have an interesting question to this. If Princess Madeline had children before Prince Carl, would her or her children be put ahead of him in succession?

No, but if neither Carl-Philip or Victoria gets legitimate heirs then Madeleines children become heirs after Victoria, Carl-Philip and Madeleine are gone.

Karisma 12-19-2010 03:37 PM

Princess Birgitta is HRH
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by mattep74 (Post 1177717)
You have it wrong. When the successionorder was changed in the 70ths it was stipulated that the only ones that could inherit the throne had to be descendand from Carl XVI Gustav. Birgitta is NOT in the successionorder.

In Sweden the only ones that are seen as royals are in fact the family of Carl XVI Gustav. His sisters and uncle with families arent seen as the extended royal family, "just" normal citizens

In addition to the members of the Royal Family, the Swedish Royal Court also includes Princess Lilian, and Princess Birgitta, married to Prince Johann Georg of Hohenzollern. Most likely would Princess Birgitta and her family be asked in the event of a disaster and the whole of the current Royal family wiped out.

Princess Birgitta is the only one of the king's sisters who married and had the old king, Gusav VI Adolf, and the government's full consent. Princess Birgitta is also the only one of the king's sisters, who have retained the title "Her Royal Highness" (HRH). Like the examples Princess Martha-Louise of Norway got the other sisters keep the title princess, but not included in the royal house as "royal highness". You can actually read the court's website on the composition of the royal house. http://www.royalcourt.se/royalcourt/royalfamily.4.396160511584257f21800060.html

mattep74 12-19-2010 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Karisma (Post 1178045)
In addition to the members of the Royal Family, the Swedish Royal Court also includes Princess Lilian, and Princess Birgitta, married to Prince Johann Georg of Hohenzollern. Most likely would Princess Birgitta and her family be asked in the event of a disaster and the whole of the current Royal family wiped out.

Princess Birgitta is the only one of the king's sisters who married and had the old king, Gusav VI Adolf, and the government's full consent. Princess Birgitta is also the only one of the king's sisters, who have retained the title "Her Royal Highness" (HRH). Like the examples Princess Martha-Louise of Norway got the other sisters keep the title princess, but not included in the royal house as "royal highness". You can actually read the court's website on the composition of the royal house. http://www.royalcourt.se/royalcourt/royalfamily.4.396160511584257f21800060.html

If the family is wiped out then we get a republic.

The kings sisters werent in the succession order BEFORE 1973 and they arent now either.

Karisma 12-19-2010 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mattep74 (Post 1178062)
If the family is wiped out then we get a republic.

The kings sisters werent in the succession order BEFORE 1973 and they arent now either.

It is of course a hypothetical question, and no one wants to even imagine such a terrible scenario that the entire royal family was wiped out! But I do not think You can assume that the parliament in two consecutive elections would vote for a constitutional amendment which would mean that Sweden became a republic in a scenario where our current Royal Family was snatched away. It would then mean that the country first, would be headed by the Speaker of the parlament as "Riksföreståndare" for a long time. None of us can know for sure. I , myself,think we would continue to Monarchy! Of course the family of HRH Princess Birgitta then will be of interest. Surely HRH Princess Birgitta and her family then become interesting as princess Birgitta followed the laws that existed when she married.

Esmerelda 12-19-2010 09:32 PM

The Act of Succession - Riksdagen
Act 1: the succession is restricted to the descendants of Carl XVI Gustaf but I don't see any mention of Prince Bertil who was then added to the sucession?

IF the entire Royal family was wiped out, might they not choose Princess Margrethe (spelling?) before Princess Birgitta on the basis of primongeniture? None of the King's sisters were ever in the line of succession to begin with and it is now acceptable to marry commoners.

On a related note if the entire Royal family got wiped out except for one of Victoria's (hypothetical) children, who would be regent?

Eve2Eden 12-19-2010 11:40 PM

I really think that- in this day and age- if any of the current European royal families happen to "die out" naturally, the country would simply revert to a republic.

mattep74 12-20-2010 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Karisma (Post 1178100)
It is of course a hypothetical question, and no one wants to even imagine such a terrible scenario that the entire royal family was wiped out! But I do not think You can assume that the parliament in two consecutive elections would vote for a constitutional amendment which would mean that Sweden became a republic in a scenario where our current Royal Family was snatched away. It would then mean that the country first, would be headed by the Speaker of the parlament as "Riksföreståndare" for a long time. None of us can know for sure. I , myself,think we would continue to Monarchy! Of course the family of HRH Princess Birgitta then will be of interest. Surely HRH Princess Birgitta and her family then become interesting as princess Birgitta followed the laws that existed when she married.

I rather have a republic than have the country represented by Birgitta, i will not say why because i think its against the rules of conduct here.

Karisma 12-20-2010 07:18 PM

Hypothetical
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Esmerelda (Post 1178218)
The Act of Succession - Riksdagen
Act 1: the succession is restricted to the descendants of Carl XVI Gustaf but I don't see any mention of Prince Bertil who was then added to the sucession?

IF the entire Royal family was wiped out, might they not choose Princess Margrethe (spelling?) before Princess Birgitta on the basis of primongeniture? None of the King's sisters were ever in the line of succession to begin with and it is now acceptable to marry commoners.

On a related note if the entire Royal family got wiped out except for one of Victoria's (hypothetical) children, who would be regent?

We are moving very hypothetical (not so nice) thoughts, but on the whole family being wiped out is Bridget or her children the only ones included in the royal house. Bridget is the only one of the princesses from Haga has been allowed to retain the title HRH because she married a prince, which was important for the old king, Gustav VI. We must remember that many of the old king's siblings were relieved of their titles when they married without royal family's permission. It is certainly so now that any child of CP Victoria will be first in line of succession. Prince Bertil came into the picture for the current king's father, Prince Gustav Adolf was killed in a plane crash. It was for that reason he refused to marry Lillian, because the Swedish royal family suddenly had no successor. Prince Carl Gustaf was a child and grandfather, King Gustav VI Adolf was already coming up in age. Would the king died before the little prince had time to reach 25 years so would Monarchy in Sweden have been wiped out "with one stroke of the pen" - that the then Prime Minister Palme said.

Karisma 12-20-2010 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mattep74 (Post 1178248)
I rather have a republic than have the country represented by Birgitta, i will not say why because i think its against the rules of conduct here.



You don´t have to. I do understand and I don´t have any other opinion. Everything is just hypotetic. :flowers:

HRH Princess Birgitta

Esmerelda 12-20-2010 08:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Karisma (Post 1178606)

You don´t have to. I do understand and I don´t have any other opinion. Everything is just hypotetic. :flowers:

HRH Princess Birgitta

I'm sorry, but-:rofl:

janb 12-21-2010 02:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Esmerelda (Post 1178218)
...
On a related note if the entire Royal family got wiped out except for one of Victoria's (hypothetical) children, who would be regent?

Either the speaker of the Riksdag (IIRC the only one outside the royal line of sucession that may act as Swedish head of state) or the Riksdag have to appoint someone else.

lilnana 12-23-2010 07:56 PM

If the king married unequally, Victoria didn't' either, and most likely neither will Madeleine or Carl Philip so to say Birgitta would make the best choice because she did doesn't hold water. And as far as primogeniture, Margaretha, along with her sisters were never apart of succession, and according to the current succession the sisters are still excluded so if they did decide to chose someone they have no reason to bound by the idea of birth order. If Sweden though that keeping their royal family that they would choose someone to take over wouldn't they want to choose the one that has been the most active in terms of representation? Christina does the most, she helped with the previous king, and still does with the current king. But this is all hypothetical, and isn't something that would realistically happen.

Josefine 02-27-2012 01:24 PM

Since 2012 February 23th
  1. HRH The Crown Princess, Duchess of Västergötland (Princess Victoria, born 1977)
  2. HRH The Duchess of Östergötland (Princess Estelle, born 2012)
  3. HRH The Duke of Värmland (Prince Carl Philip, born 1979)
  4. HRH The Duchess of Hälsingland and Gästrikland (Princess Madeleine, born 1982)

Josefine 02-27-2012 01:51 PM

The last time the line og succesion was changed were 1997 january 5th when prince Bertil died who were 4th in line

in the bernadotte era as most there 11 in line to the throne

31th october 1916, prince Carl Johan is born

HRH The Crown Prince, Duke of Skåne (prince Gustaf Adolf born 1982)
HRH Duke of Västerbotten, (prince Gustaf Adolf born 1906)
HRH Duke of Uppland (prince Sigvard born 1907)
HRH Duke of Halland (prince Bertil born 1912)
HRH Duke of Dalarna (prince Carl Johan born 1916)
HRH Duke of Södermanland (prince Wilhelm born 1984)
HRH Duke of Småland (prince Lennart born 1909)
HRH Duke of Västmanland (prince Erik born 1989)
HRH Duke of Västergötland (prince Carl born 1911)
HRH Duke of Östergötland (prince Carl jr born 1911)
HRH Duke of Närke (prince Eugen born 1965)

Meraude 03-02-2012 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Karisma (Post 1177583)
* The only one of King Carl XVI Gustaf siblings who married King Gusav the VI th Adolf state, and the Swedish Government, is Princess Birgitta of marriage to Prince Johann Georg of Hohenzollern. Most likely would Princess Birgitta and her family be asked in the event of a disaster and the whole of the current Royal family wiped out.

I would guess that all three of princess Birgitta's children are Catholics (as they all have Maria among their names and their father being a Catholic), and as the Swedish succession order says in 4§ ( https://lagen.nu/1810:0926 ) that a person who doesn't belong to the "pure Evangelical faith" and have not been brought up in that faith, are excluded from the succession, which should make the Hohenzollern children non-eligible.

Grandduchess24 03-24-2012 02:21 PM

Does the catholic rule apply to the Swedish royal family as well? You know if you marry a catholic you lose your place in the line of succession?

Lumutqueen 03-24-2012 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grandduchess24 (Post 1391579)
Does the catholic rule apply to the Swedish royal family as well? You know if you marry a catholic you lose your place in the line of succession?

There is a provision that states, the royal family shall belong to the "pure evangelical faith", i.e., the (Evangelical-Lutheran) Church of Sweden. It says nothing about limiting marriage to a member of a different faith.

Artemisia 03-24-2012 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grandduchess24 (Post 1391579)
Does the catholic rule apply to the Swedish royal family as well? You know if you marry a catholic you lose your place in the line of succession?

Catholics are barred from inheriting the Throne but, unlike Britain, they are not the only ones. The Swedish Act of Succession 1810 states that the Monarch and members of the Royal Family must belong to Lutheran (evangelical) faith.
Other limitations:
- Children of the Monarchmust be brought up in Sweden
- Members of the Royal Family cannot marry without the Monarch's consent
- The heir to the throne cannot travel abroad without the Monarch's permission

Lumutqueen 03-24-2012 03:01 PM

The heir is also prevented from becoming the head of state in another country, either by election or marriage, without the consent of the monarch and the government, by forfeit of all rights of succession for themselves and their heirs.

mattep74 03-24-2012 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Artemisia (Post 1391617)
Catholics are barred from inheriting the Throne but, unlike Britain, they are not the only ones. The Swedish Act of Succession 1810 states that the Monarch and members of the Royal Family must belong to Lutheran (evangelical) faith.
Other limitations:
- Children of the Monarchmust be brought up in Sweden
- Members of the Royal Family cannot marry without the Monarch's consent
- The heir to the throne cannot travel abroad without the Monarch's permission

many swedes think its strange that the royal family must be lutherans as the Swedish church isnt what you would call a lutheran church nowdays. Its more of a socialdemocratic church

Esmerelda 03-24-2012 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grandduchess24
Does the catholic rule apply to the Swedish royal family as well? You know if you marry a catholic you lose your place in the line of succession?

This is from the Act of Succession (via google translate)
the King shall always profess the pure evangelical doctrine, such as that in the unaltered Augsburg Confession, and the Uppsala Meeting decision of the year 1593, adopted and explained, thus princes and princesses of the Royal. House shall be brought in the same faith and within the realm. Those of the Royal Family not professing this faith, from all rights of succession is excluded. Act (1979:935).

I take that to mean the spouses of those in the line of succession can profess any religion as they never had a right to the throne in the first place.

Meraude 03-26-2012 03:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grandduchess24 (Post 1391579)
Does the catholic rule apply to the Swedish royal family as well? You know if you marry a catholic you lose your place in the line of succession?

No, there is nothing preventing a member of the Swedish royal family to marry a Catholic, in fact queen Désirée remained a Catholic all her life and Oscar I married Joséphine who kept her Catholic faith and brought a Catholic priest with her to Sweden, and her children were brought up in the Lutheran faith.

Esmerelda 03-26-2012 07:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Meraude
No, there is nothing preventing a member of the Swedish royal family to marry a Catholic, in fact queen Désirée remained a Catholic all her life and Oscar I married Joséphine who kept her Catholic faith and brought a Catholic priest with her to Sweden, and her children were brought up in the Lutheran faith.

Did Carl XIV Johan have to convert to Protestantism?

Meraude 03-26-2012 11:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Esmerelda (Post 1392548)
Did Carl XIV Johan have to convert to Protestantism?

Yes, both Karl XIV Johan and Oscar I had to convert to Lutheranism when Karl Johan became heir to the Swedish throne.

Josefine 02-21-2014 11:26 AM

This is the first time since 1950 there Will be 5 Line of succession
In oktober 29th, 1950, Gustav V dies And the succession were 4.

T
20 februari 2014, princess NN, daughter to princess Madeleine was born
1. Crown princess Victoria,
2. Princess Estelle,
3. Princess Carl Philip,
4. Princess Madeleine,
5. Princess NN,

Josefine 02-21-2014 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Josefine (Post 1377404)
The last time the line og succesion was changed were 1997 january 5th when prince Bertil died who were 4th in line

in the bernadotte era as most there 11 in line to the throne

31th october 1916, prince Carl Johan is born

HRH The Crown Prince, Duke of Skåne (prince Gustaf Adolf born 1982)
HRH Duke of Västerbotten, (prince Gustaf Adolf born 1906)
HRH Duke of Uppland (prince Sigvard born 1907)
HRH Princess Ingrid (born 1910)
HRH Duke of Halland (prince Bertil born 1912)
HRH Duke of Dalarna (prince Carl Johan born 1916)
HRH Duke of Södermanland (prince Wilhelm born 1984)
HRH Duke of Småland (prince Lennart born 1909)
HRH Duke of Västmanland (prince Erik born 1989)
HRH Duke of Västergötland (prince Carl born 1861)
HRH Princess Margaretha (bron 1899)
HRH Princess Märtha (born 1901)
HRH Princess Astrid (born 1905)

HRH Duke of Östergötland (prince Carl jr born 1911)
HRH Duke of Närke (prince Eugen born 1965)

I wonder what the list would look like if girls were included

Josefine 03-05-2016 06:24 AM

The new line of succession is from 2016.03.02
The Last time there were 7 in line in sweden were when the current king was born april 30th 1946
The Kings father died january 26th 1947 and there were yes again 6 in line to the swedish throne

1. Crown princess Victoria,
2. Princess Estelle,
3. Prince Oscar
4. Prince Carl Philip,
5. Princess Madeleine,
6. Princess Leonore
7. Prince Nicolas

GracieGiraffe 03-05-2016 07:41 AM

:previous: Soon to be 8 and I think we can expect at least one more little one, perhaps 3-4 more in the coming years. Never mind the line of succession, grandma and grandpa have a lot of toy shopping to do at Christmas these days.

Madame Verseau 03-05-2016 07:58 AM

By the king's birthday on April 30th, the line of succession will be:

1. Crown princess Victoria,
2. Princess Estelle,
3. Prince Oscar,
4. Prince Carl Philip,
5. Prince(ss) Bernadotte-Hellqvist,
6. Princess Madeleine,
7. Princess Leonore
8. Prince Nicolas

xenobia 03-05-2016 08:03 AM

There were some criticism when Madeleines children got royal rank and titles from the king. But I think it's very logical. He has first hand knowledge of the difficulties that a royal family can have if and when the line of succession is very short. With the development we're seeing - all the kings three children will soon be parents - the line of succession is secure. And I honestly think that he considers that the best part of his legacy.

xenobia 03-05-2016 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madame Verseau (Post 1868946)
By the king's birthday on April 30th, the line of succession will be:

1. Crown princess Victoria,
2. Princess Estelle,
3. Prince Oscar,
4. Prince Carl Philip,
5. Prince(ss) Bernadotte-Hellqvist,
6. Princess Madeleine,
7. Princess Leonore
8. Prince Nicolas

Yes, but as you know the #5 won't have a last name, just like his/her cousins. He/she will just be prince/princess NN.

I also think that Madeleine will have more children, and it's very likely that Carl Philip will add to the succession order more than once. So my guess is that there will be at least 10 people in this line within the next few years.

Josefine 03-05-2016 08:09 AM

During the time when a Bernadotte have been on the throne there has benen 11 at the maximum

Madame Verseau 03-05-2016 08:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Furienna (Post 599823)
But Sweden is a liberal country though, when it comes to this issue. During the last five decades, the status of the illegitimate have increased. I don't even think a royal having an illegitimate would raise too many eyebrows anymore.

To be a successor to the Swedish throne the child has to be born in wedlock:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_o...Swedish_throne

Meaning, if any member of the SRF has a child that was a result of a hook up, fling, long term affair without benefit of clergy at the end is ineligible for the throne.

xenobia 03-05-2016 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madame Verseau (Post 1868953)
To be a successor to the Swedish throne the child has to be born in wedlock:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_o...Swedish_throne

Meaning, if any member of the SRF has a child that was a result of a hook up, fling, long term affair without benefit of clergy at the end is ineligible for the throne.

This is quite interesting! I've always assumed that children born out of wedlock can't inherit the throne. But the law text about the line of succession doesn't mention anything about that. I've read it twice now, and can't find a paragraph about this.

Madame Verseau 03-05-2016 04:25 PM

Here's the link to the Swedish Act of Succession:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_Act_of_Succession

The bullet points are as follows:

Only children born in wedlock may inherit the Throne.

Only the descendants of Carl XVI Gustaf may inherit the Throne.

A prince or princess in the line of succession shall belong to and profess the "pure evangelical faith", as defined in the Unaltered Augsburg Confession and the Uppsala Meeting of 1591, i.e. by implication the Church of Sweden.

The offspring of an approved marriage must be brought up within Sweden.

A prince or princess may not marry and remain in the line of succession without having received consent, upon application of the Monarch, from the Government of Sweden.

A prince or princess is also prevented from becoming monarch of another country, either by election or marriage, without the consent of the Monarch and the Government.

If any of these provisions are violated: all rights of succession for the person concerned and all descendants are lost.

It's not clear what constitute "legitimate"? Does the child have to be conceived and born in wedlock?

xenobia 03-05-2016 04:49 PM

But that's not the Swedish Act of succession, it's a wikipedia article in english, and also just a summary. This is the law text in swedish: https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/Dokument...sfs-1810-0926/

I read it twice, and my university major was in history. I still can't see something in there that explicitly says that the child has to be born in wedlock. It talks about "bröstarvingar", but that just means children and grandchildren. The only explanation I can think of right now is that the word "bröstarvingar" meant "children within marriage" when the text was written, but that the word has now changed its meaning.

Edit: I think I found it! The text just before the paragraphs says "... hans kungl. höghets JOHAN BAPTIST JULII, furstens av Ponte-Corvo, äkta manliga bröstarvingar". The word "äkta" could be translated to "legitimate".

Meraude 03-05-2016 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Josefine (Post 1643003)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Josefine (Post 1643003)
In the bernadotte era as most there 11 in line to the throne
31th october 1916, prince Carl Johan is born

HRH The Crown Prince, Duke of Skåne (prince Gustaf Adolf born 1982)
HRH Duke of Västerbotten, (prince Gustaf Adolf born 1906)
HRH Duke of Uppland (prince Sigvard born 1907)
HRH Princess Ingrid (born 1910)
HRH Duke of Halland (prince Bertil born 1912)
HRH Duke of Dalarna (prince Carl Johan born 1916)
HRH Duke of Södermanland (prince Wilhelm born 1984)
HRH Duke of Småland (prince Lennart born 1909)
HRH Duke of Västmanland (prince Erik born 1989)
HRH Duke of Västergötland (prince Carl born 1861)
HRH Princess Margaretha (bron 1899)
HRH Princess Märtha (born 1901)
HRH Princess Astrid (born 1905)

HRH Duke of Östergötland (prince Carl jr born 1911)
HRH Duke of Närke (prince Eugen born 19651865)


I wonder what the list would look like if girls were included

Shouldn't HM The Queen Dowager of Denmark, born HRH princess Lovisa of Sweden, also be on that list? I would guess that she had her father's permission to marry the future king of Denmark, and thus still be in the Order of Succession, if females had been permitted then. If so, wouldn't all of her children and her grandchildren (in 1916 eight children and nine more grandchildren than the four on the list above) also be in the Order of Succession? Among those children and grandchildren would have been the king of Denmark, the king of Norway, the crown prince of Denmark (the future husband of Ingrid), the crown prince of Norway (the future husband of Märtha) and the wife of the duke of Västergötland.

Madame Verseau 03-05-2016 08:09 PM

The monarchy of Sweden consists only of Carl Gustaf, his children, grandchildren and the descendants of his line. The Haga princesses and their children are not considered successors to the throne, as I understand it. Given that, I wonder if any pressure was put on Victoria, Carl Philip or Madeleine to continue the Bernadotte line when they married - Victoria because she's the heir, Carl Philip to continue the Bernadotte name in the traditional sense and Madeleine just to have another line of spares. And their choices - I wonder if one of the factors that was considered before the king and the Riksdag signed off on their joining the SRF was the ability to father or conceive a child. If that were true and if a prince or princess' choice was unable to produce an heir, would that have been a disqualifer? As I read the law an adopted child could not be a successor, only legitimate (born of a marriage) children of the blood royal.

Back to legitimacy. I think that was put into the law not-so-royal children that are the result of a hook up, fling or long term affair cannot go to court and sue for succession rights.

Josefine 09-01-2017 02:58 AM

on August 31th, the line of succession is as follow

1. Crown Princess Victoria, Duchess of Västergötland
2. Princess Estelle, Duchess of Östergötland
3. Prince Oscar, Duke of Skåne
4. Prince Carl Philip, Duke of Värmland
5. Prince Alexander, Duke of Södermanland
6. Prince X
7. Princess Madeleine, Duchess of Hälsingland and Gästrikland
8. Princess Leonore, Duchess of Gotland
9. Prince Nicolas, Duke of Ångermanland


And next year an other prince or princess will be born

Bine221 09-01-2017 04:27 AM

As we soon will have a 10th person in line of succession (Madeleines 3rd child), the Swedish Line of Succession is one of the healthiest since last century... thanks to the chance of law to female succession/primogeniture
BYe Bine

An Ard Ri 09-01-2017 04:52 AM

For so many years it was just the kings 3 children,how it continues to grow!

xenobia 09-01-2017 05:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by An Ard Ri (Post 2013932)
For so many years it was just the kings 3 children,how it continues to grow!

And before that, from 1973 to 1977, there was only one person in line besides the king: prince Bertil, who didn't have any children. So I think that the king is very well aware of how serious the situation was for the monarchy just a few decades ago, and that gives him another reason to be happy for every grandchild that arrives. Personally I think that this is the reason why it was so important that Madeleines (and later on also Carl Philips) children received titles and was included in the line of succession.

Duc_et_Pair 09-01-2017 05:50 AM

The big family, all with HRH and Princes/Princesses, which on time will marry partners who will be HRH and Princes/Princesses as well holds a risk and a certain inflation of the title.

I understand the King not wanting to make a difference in his grandchildren, but I think it was wiser to follow the example of other monarchies and limit the the flood of princelings to the children of a King or a Heir only. For an example by creating them a Count(ess) Bernadotte or whatever.

When Victoria is Queen, the royal family will then more or less look like this (more sustainable for the future):

- HM The Queen
- HRH The Prince
- HRH The Crown Princess
- HRH Prince Oscar

- HRH Prince Carl Philip
- HRH Princess Sofia
- Count Alexander
- Count XYZ

- HRH Princess Madeleine
- Mr Christopher O'Neill
- Countess Leonore
- Count Nicholas
- Count(ess) XYZ

Stefan 09-01-2017 05:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair (Post 2013940)
The big family, all with HRH and Princes/Princesses, which on time will marry partners who will be HRH and Princes/Princesses as well holds a risk and a certain inflation of the title.

I understand the King not wanting to make a difference in his grandchildren, but I think it was wiser to follow the example of other monarchies and limit the the flood of princelings to the children of a King or a Heir only. For an example by creating them a Count(ess) Bernadotte or whatever.

When Victoria is Queen, the royal family will then more or less look like this (more sustainable for the future):

- HM The Queen
- HRH The Prince
- HRH The Crown Princess
- HRH Prince Oscar

- HRH Prince Carl Philip
- HRH Princess Sofia
- Count Alexander
- Count XYZ

- HRH Princess Madeleine
- Mr Christopher O'Neill
- Countess Leonore
- Count Nicholas
- Count(ess) XYZ

The problem with you scenario is that the swedish King can not create noble Titles. He can only decide about the Title Prince/Princess and which Dukedom they will get.
The Title Count Bernadotte the Princes who lost their Title after their marriage got was created by the Grand Duchess of Luxembourg.

Josefine 09-04-2017 08:36 AM

on August 31th, the line of succession is as follow

1. Crown Princess Victoria, Duchess of Västergötland
2. Princess Estelle, Duchess of Östergötland
3. Prince Oscar, Duke of Skåne
4. Prince Carl Philip, Duke of Värmland
5. Prince Alexander, Duke of Södermanland
6. Prince Gabriel, Duke of Dalarna
7. Princess Madeleine, Duchess of Hälsingland and Gästrikland
8. Princess Leonore, Duchess of Gotland
9. Prince Nicolas, Duke of Ångermanland


And next year an other prince or princess will be born[/QUOTE]

Last time there were 9 in line for the Swedish throne were between February 20th, 1932 and march 8th, 1934

The record in with 11 princes in line for the Swedish throne
oktober 31th, 1916 -20 september 20th, 1918,

Mbruno 09-04-2017 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Josefine (Post 2014962)
on August 31th, the line of succession is as follow

1. Crown Princess Victoria, Duchess of Västergötland
2. Princess Estelle, Duchess of Östergötland
3. Prince Oscar, Duke of Skåne
4. Prince Carl Philip, Duke of Värmland
5. Prince Alexander, Duke of Södermanland
6. Prince Gabriel, Duke of Dalarna
7. Princess Madeleine, Duchess of Hälsingland and Gästrikland
8. Princess Leonore, Duchess of Gotland
9. Prince Nicolas, Duke of Ångermanland


And next year an other prince or princess will be born


I suspect Madeleine's children will eventually be dropped from the line of succession as Chris won't agree to move back permanently to Sweden when the children reach school age. Then I assume they will lose the titles of "prince/princess of Sweden", being probably known instead as "Prince/Princess [xxx] Bernadotte", without the HRH style and the respective duchy, but that is just speculative thinking on my part.

Last time there were 9 in line for the Swedish throne were between 1932 February 20th and 1934 march 8th[/QUOTE]

Madame Verseau 09-04-2017 10:36 AM

I think with so many successors to the Silver Throne the Riksdag will take matters into its own hands about who gets HRH and who gets appanage for tax and other financial considerations. As of now there are seven members of the king's immediate family that do not have a chance to ascend to the throne unless there is a horrible tragedy. I can see the Riskdag saying no appanage for the Prince Family and the Princess Family with exception that Carl Philip will receive money from the government when he would have to act as regent during Estelle's minority. The law was drastically changed in 1979 to take the heir apparent title away from CP.

Countessmeout 09-04-2017 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mbruno (Post 2014966)
I suspect Madeleine's children will eventually be dropped from the line of succession as Chris won't agree to move back permanently to Sweden when the children reach school age. Then I assume they will lose the titles of "prince/princess of Sweden", being probably known instead as "Prince/Princess [xxx] Bernadotte", without the HRH style and the respective duchy, but that is just speculative thinking on my part.

Last time there were 9 in line for the Swedish throne were between 1932 February 20th and 1934 march 8th

[/QUOTE]

There is no reason they would lose their titles simply their unnecessary now places in succession. Their duchies were bestowed by grandpa and its up to him and not parliament or any rule.

But wouldn't rule out the kids going to school in Sweden. Isn't Leonor said to be enrolled in a Swedish preschool when in Stockholm?

Skippy 09-04-2017 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair (Post 2013940)
The big family, all with HRH and Princes/Princesses, which on time will marry partners who will be HRH and Princes/Princesses as well holds a risk and a certain inflation of the title.

I understand the King not wanting to make a difference in his grandchildren, but I think it was wiser to follow the example of other monarchies and limit the the flood of princelings to the children of a King or a Heir only. For an example by creating them a Count(ess) Bernadotte or whatever.

When Victoria is Queen, the royal family will then more or less look like this (more sustainable for the future):

- HM The Queen
- HRH The Prince
- HRH The Crown Princess
- HRH Prince Oscar

- HRH Prince Carl Philip
- HRH Princess Sofia
- Count Alexander
- Count XYZ

- HRH Princess Madeleine
- Mr Christopher O'Neill
- Countess Leonore
- Count Nicholas
- Count(ess) XYZ

I thought that you would be happy with Prince Carl Philip having another son? Since he is the only one able to carry on the Bernadotte bloodline. Take Carl Philip away and the Bernadottes are gone. And no, Prince Daniel having added Bernadotte to his name doesn't count.

Tatiana Maria 09-04-2017 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skippy (Post 2015056)
And no, Prince Daniel having added Bernadotte to his name doesn't count.

Olof Daniel Westling Bernadotte, Prince of Sweden, did not transfer his middle name of Westling to his children, who are only Bernadottes.

Skippy 09-05-2017 03:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria (Post 2015124)
Olof Daniel Westling Bernadotte, Prince of Sweden, did not transfer his middle name of Westling to his children, who are only Bernadottes.

In name maybe, but by blood Oscar carries on the Westling line. Simply because his father is one.
Carl Philip and now Alexander and Gabriel are the only ones able to carry the bloodline back to the start of the House of Bernadotte.
That's as simple as it is, just look at the family tree.

Stefan 09-05-2017 04:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madame Verseau (Post 2015037)
I think with so many successors to the Silver Throne the Riksdag will take matters into its own hands about who gets HRH and who gets appanage for tax and other financial considerations. As of now there are seven members of the king's immediate family that do not have a chance to ascend to the throne unless there is a horrible tragedy. I can see the Riskdag saying no appanage for the Prince Family and the Princess Family with exception that Carl Philip will receive money from the government when he would have to act as regent during Estelle's minority. The law was drastically changed in 1979 to take the heir apparent title away from CP.

It would be easier if the Riksdag would allow the monarch to give noble Titles to the people in line of succession/Royal House like it is the case in Denmark.
As for the Apanage as i understand Carl Philip and Madeleine now only get money from the Apanage when the perfiorm duties on behalf of the King/Royal House.
I also doubt it will be made sure that the children of Carl Phioklip and Madeleine will have to earn the own Money and get a Job.

xenobia 09-05-2017 05:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skippy (Post 2015462)
In name maybe, but by blood Oscar carries on the Westling line. Simply because his father is one.
Carl Philip and now Alexander and Gabriel are the only ones able to carry the bloodline back to the start of the House of Bernadotte.
That's as simple as it is, just look at the family tree.

I don't think I understand this. If it's blood that's important, then the child has 50/50 from the mother and father. The "blood line" would then be equally valid no matter if it's the father or mothers last name on the paper.

Skippy 09-05-2017 05:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xenobia (Post 2015473)
I don't think I understand this. If it's blood that's important, then the child has 50/50 from the mother and father. The "blood line" would then be equally valid no matter if it's the father or mothers last name on the paper.

It derives from the (old-fashioned) patrilineal line. Females can't carry on, for their offspring will be added to their husband's family.

That's why I say that Carl Philip, Alexander and now Gabriel are the sole ones continuing the Bernadotte bloodline.

Marengo 09-05-2017 05:35 AM

:previous:

A rather archaic concept that does not take into account the law. With your reasoning the houses of Habsburg, Romanov, Orange-Nassau, Nassau-Weilburg etc. do not exist.

Skippy 09-05-2017 05:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marengo (Post 2015477)
:previous:

A rather archaic concept that does not take into account the law. With your reasoning the houses of Habsburg, Romanov, Orange-Nassau, Nassau-Weilburg etc. do not exist.

True, this post from The Scandinavian Royals Message Board mentions the same:

By Robert Warholm:
"I agree. That would have made it possible to keep the throne for the Bernadotte dynasty. Yes, I know that people change their names so they can pretend to be Bernadottes, but genealogically, that is not correct. The House of Romanov, the House of Habsburg and The House of Nassau are extinct. The Prince of Wales is really not a Windsor. The senior Windsor when the current Queen is gone will be the Duke of Gloucester. Crown Princess Victoria will be the last Bernadotte on the Swedish throne, but the dynasty will live on through Prince Carl Philip and his sons.

That being said, I think that CP Victoria will made a better Monarchy than Prince Carl Philip would."

I share this opinion, as much disagreement as possible it may provide.

Marengo 09-05-2017 10:25 AM

That may be the opinion of the poster, but it is based on a fantasy and not on reality. There is no legal basis for his claim. With such an opinion one ignores that our societies are ruled by the law and not on -what is now an outdated- concept of 'genealogy'. If we would deny law all together, there would not be a house of Bernadotte as the Baden family would be the genealogical heirs of the house of Wasa.

Likewise, if we deny the law, there would be no house of Orange -or Amsberg if you want- in the Netherlands but our ruler would be King Felipe VI and there would be no house of Windsor but the Duke of Bavaria would be ruling over England and Scotland.

It may be nice to daydream about such matters and it may be an interesting work-out in royal genealogy, but it has nothing to do with the reality in which we live. And that reality is that the main branch of the house of Bernadotte will continue through the crown princess and her offspring.

Fijiro 09-05-2017 01:30 PM

Crown Princess Victoria is a Bernadotte not a Sommerlath
in the same logic Princess Estelle & Prince Oscar are Westling not Bernadotte

xenobia 09-05-2017 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fijiro (Post 2015760)
Crown Princess Victoria is a Bernadotte not a Sommerlath
in the same logic Princess Estelle & Prince Oscar are Westling not Bernadotte

You have the right to that opinion. I would say that most swedes sees the thing quite differently. Victoria is as much a Sommerlath as she is a Bernadotte, and Estelle/Oscar are just as much Bernadotte as they are Westling.

It really doesn't matter who's last name you have - you are still equal parts from your father and mother. That is reflected in the name laws here in Sweden. Whey you get married, there are several options. Both can keep their last names. Both can have hers or his name. Or you can chose a new last name (within some boundaries). The question of last name isn't a big thing here.

JR76 09-05-2017 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marengo (Post 2015613)
That may be the opinion of the poster, but it is based on a fantasy and not on reality. There is no legal basis for his claim. With such an opinion one ignores that our societies are ruled by the law and not on -what is now an outdated- concept of 'genealogy'. If we would deny law all together, there would not be a house of Bernadotte as the Baden family would be the genealogical heirs of the house of Wasa.

Likewise, if we deny the law, there would be no house of Orange -or Amsberg if you want- in the Netherlands but our ruler would be King Felipe VI and there would be no house of Windsor but the Duke of Bavaria would be ruling over England and Scotland.

It may be nice to daydream about such matters and it may be an interesting work-out in royal genealogy, but it has nothing to do with the reality in which we live. And that reality is that the main branch of the house of Bernadotte will continue through the crown princess and her offspring.

Well, actually after the death of Queen Carola of Saxony in 1907 and then the death of her cousin's son Grand Duke Friedrich II of Baden in 1928 the main line of inheritance from the House of Holstein-Gottorp went to his sister Victoria, by then Queen of Sweden, uniting the two royal lines.
Added to that the family's claim to the throne was quite distant at the time Adolf Fredrik of Holstein-Gottorp was elected Crown prince going back to the early 1600s. The closest heir to the House of Pfalz-Zweibrucken and through them the House of Vasa was the grandson of Karl XI, Duke Peter of Holstein-Gottorp (another branch than Adolf Fredrik). Although favoured by both his great-grandmother Queen Dowager Hedvig Eleonora and his uncle King Karl XII Peter was sidelined by his aunt Ulrika Eleonora and never reached the throne though his son Paul ended up in Russia instead where he, when becoming emperor, founded the House of Holstein-Gottorp-Romanov. By a few twists of fate we have a Bernadotte on the Swedish throne and the main heir to King Gustav I Vasa among the Ilyinskys in Florida.

Mbruno 09-05-2017 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xenobia (Post 2015767)
You have the right to that opinion. I would say that most swedes sees the thing quite differently. Victoria is as much a Sommerlath as she is a Bernadotte, and Estelle/Oscar are just as much Bernadotte as they are Westling.

It really doesn't matter who's last name you have - you are still equal parts from your father and mother. That is reflected in the name laws here in Sweden. Whey you get married, there are several options. Both can keep their last names. Both can have hers or his name. Or you can chose a new last name (within some boundaries). The question of last name isn't a big thing here.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but in some countries such as Belgium, children can now legally take their father's family name, or their mother's, or both (the latter in any order they choose, i.e the maternal family name followed by the paternal one, or vice-versa). So basically, the patrilineal rule as the standard for family naming conventions no longer applies. I don't know how the law in Sweden works, but, in any case, Daniel changed his last name to Bernadotte and, even under the patrilineal rule, his children are legally Bernadottes rather than Westlings.

Personally, I understand that traditionalists might be against those kinds of "tricks", but, if they feel so strongly about keeping the throne within the same family (as defined in a strictly patrilineal sense), then they should accordingly support male-preference primogeniture, or even agnatic primogeniture., as it used to be the case in the past. One can't really have equal primogeniture and expect at the same time that the succession will be always confined to the same patrilineal dynasty.

Marengo 09-05-2017 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR76 (Post 2015773)
Well, actually after the death of Queen Carola of Saxony in 1907 and then the death of her cousin's son Grand Duke Friedrich II of Baden in 1928 the main line of inheritance from the House of Holstein-Gottorp went to his sister Victoria, by then Queen of Sweden, uniting the two royal lines.
Added to that the family's claim to the throne was quite distant at the time Adolf Fredrik of Holstein-Gottorp was elected Crown prince going back to the early 1600s. The closest heir to the House of Pfalz-Zweibrucken and through them the House of Vasa was the grandson of Karl XI, Duke Peter of Holstein-Gottorp (another branch than Adolf Fredrik). Although favoured by both his great-grandmother Queen Dowager Hedvig Eleonora and his uncle King Karl XII Peter was sidelined by his aunt Ulrika Eleonora and never reached the throne though his son Paul ended up in Russia instead where he, when becoming emperor, founded the House of Holstein-Gottorp-Romanov. By a few twists of fate we have a Bernadotte on the Swedish throne and the main heir to King Gustav I Vasa among the Ilyinskys in Florida.

Thank you for the correction, JR76. And for the informative post. I was reasoning through an male-preference line from the descendants of the last Vasa king through GDss Sophia of Baden, nee Vasa (or HG). I forgot all about the Russian 'branch' of the house of Holstein-Gottrop so I stand corrected.

Duc_et_Pair 09-05-2017 03:06 PM

Whatever the surname, Carl Philip is the direct male agnate of a line of male descendants, from father to son, from the first King of the Bernadotte dynasty. His sons continue the direct male agnatic royal lineage.

On his part, Daniel Westling is a male agnate, a descendant from father to son, of generations of Westlings. Suddenly this Westling procreates "Bernadottes" and that is a pure masquerade of the simple fact that Estelle Westling is the future head of state of Sweden, taken for granted that the monarchy survives.

The same counts for Albert and Jacques de Polignac, direct male agnatic descendants of the Maison de Chalencon de Polignac but the same masquerade as in Sweden was applied: Albert's grandfather Pierre de Polignac assumed the surname Grimaldi when he married Charlotte Grimaldi (who herself was a masquerade as well as all her princely descendants in male agnatic line were from the Maison de Goyon de Matignon and not Grimaldi at all). "800 years House of Grimaldi", pfff spare me the laughter...

Estelle Westling
Christian de Laborde de Monpezat
Catharina-Amalia von Amsberg
Charles von Glücksborg
Guillaume de Bourbon de Parme
Elisabeth von Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha
Jacques de Polignac

These would have been the surnames had normal paternal agnatic rule applied. When Daniel Westling was acceptable for the Crown Princess, for the King and for the Government, then I fail to see why his surname was not acceptable.

The double standards would apply again when Estelle marries: her offspring will be "Bernadottes" too thanks to another name change but those of her brother do not need a name change, after all their father is already a "Bernadotte", isn't it? The whole vaudeville is furtherer obscuring the one and only real dynastic procreation of the real Bernadottes, the lineage of Carl Philip.

It was more chique and more transparent if the children of Victoria were Westling-Bernadotte, and the children of Madeleine O'Neill-Bernadotte. Their fathers are now completely whitewashed in their very own offspring, which on itself has the hidden message: your name is too pauvre, let us name them Bernadotte.

Mbruno 09-05-2017 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair (Post 2015827)
Whatever the surname, Carl Philip is the direct male agnate of a line of male descendants, from father to son, from the first King of the Bernadotte dynasty. His sons continue the direct male agnatic royal lineage.

On his part, Daniel Westling is a male agnate, a descendant from father to son, of generations of Westlings. Suddenly this Westling procreates "Bernadottes" and that is a pure masquerade of the simple fact that Estelle Westling is the future head of state of Sweden, taken for granted that the monarchy survives.

The same counts for Albert and Jacques de Polignac, direct male agnatic descendants of the Maison de Chalencon de Polignac but the same masquerade as in Sweden was applied: his grandfather Pierre de Polignac assumed the surname Grimaldi when he married Charlotte Grimaldi (who herself was a masquerade as well as all her princely descendants in male agnatic line were from the Maison de Goyon de Matignon and not Grimaldi at all). "800 years House of Grimaldi", pfff spare me the laughter...

Estelle Westling
Christian de Laborde de Monpezat
Catharina-Amalia von Amsberg
Charles von Glücksborg
Guillaume de Bourbon de Parme
Elisabeth von Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha
Jacques de Polignac

These would have been the surnames had normal paternal agnatic rule applied

Well, none of those names are legally used by the above-listed individuals, so the point is rather moot, isn't it ? For example, Prince Philip himself had already taken his mother's family name (Mountbatten) rather than Glücksburg (which BTW he never used either as a member of the Greek royal family). So, even if Philip insisted in passing his family name to his descendants, they wouldn't be called "Glücksburg"

In the past, the most common compromise was actually to have a compound name such as Habsburg-Lothringen , Braganza-Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, or Mountbatten-Windsor, which I believe is the most sensible thing to do .

xenobia 09-05-2017 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mbruno (Post 2015774)
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but in some countries such as Belgium, children can now legally take their father's family name, or their mother's, or both (the latter in any order they choose, i.e the maternal family name followed by the paternal one, or vice-versa). So basically, the patrilineal rule as the standard for family naming conventions no longer applies. I don't know how the law in Sweden works, but, in any case, Daniel changed his last name to Bernadotte and, even under the patrilineal rule, his children are legally Bernadottes rather than Westlings.

Personally, I understand that traditionalists might be against those kinds of "tricks", but, if they feel so strongly about keeping the throne within the same family (as defined in a strictly patrilineal sense), then they should accordingly support male-preference primogeniture, or even agnatic primogeniture., as it used to be the case in the past. One can't really have equal primogeniture and expect at the same time that the succession will be always confined to the same patrilineal dynasty.

Regarding kids: The parents are free to chose what last name the child will have, if they have different last names. If none is officially chosen, the child is given the same name as the mother in official records. But almost all parents with last name make that choice when they report the official names of the child.

I do understand that this may sound strange to people who live in countries with different habits. And it wasn't always like this here. The law changed in 1982, and was adjusted just two months ago (even more liberal when it comes to what new names you can chose, and things like that). I can honestly say that most people here don't care about patriarchal blood lines and stuff like that.

JR76 09-05-2017 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marengo (Post 2015783)
Thank you for the correction, JR76. And for the informative post. I was reasoning through an male-preference line from the descendants of the last Vasa king through GDss Sophia of Baden, nee Vasa (or HG). I forgot all about the Russian 'branch' of the house of Holstein-Gottrop so I stand corrected.

It wasnt meant as a correction of your post but more as a commentary. I find the whole Holstein-Gottorp business quite amusing and one of those big "what ifs" of history. Without Paul no Catherine and without her who knows in what direction Russia and Europe wouldve developed.

Kingen 09-05-2017 03:37 PM

I see that from a traditional genealogical perspective, Prince Carl Philip is the real heir to the dynasty. But I think that most Swedes don't see it that way. The old ways don't matter anymore. The Line and the House of Bernadotte will follow the Heir to the throne, the Crown Prince(ss). Only in case if this position would be dormant, a new House, with a new name would apply.

And when we get into details, it is not a question of surname. Only members of the Royal Family since 2010, has a surname (e.g. Bernadotte, or something like that). The members before that don't have a surname, but is only members of the House of Bernadotte.

As someone pointed out previously in the thread, are spouses in Sweden allowed to take his or her surname. So, I don't think that Daniel Westling's surname wasn't good enough, but more likely that Crown Princess Victoria is the legal heir to the House of Bernadotte, no matter what tradition says.

Kingen 09-05-2017 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xenobia (Post 2015841)
Regarding kids: The parents are free to chose what last name the child will have, if they have different last names. If none is officially chosen, the child is given the same name as the mother in official records. But almost all parents with last name make that choice when they report the official names of the child.

I do understand that this may sound strange to people who live in countries with different habits. And it wasn't always like this here. The law changed in 1982, and was adjusted just two months ago (even more liberal when it comes to what new names you can chose, and things like that). I can honestly say that most people here don't care about patriarchal blood lines and stuff like that.

I totally agree. That is a non-issue here. It would just have been weird if Crown Princess Victoria would have taken the surname Westling. Not sure that would have been appreciated by everyone.

Pranter 09-05-2017 04:08 PM

So why not a hyphenated surname? Many women do this...it honors both names.


LaRae

Fijiro 09-05-2017 05:32 PM

When the reign goes through a queen regnant, the reigning house’s name changes when her descendants succeed her. That’s why in the UK, for example, we had Tudor, Stuart, Hanover, Saxe-Coburg & Gotha.Queen Victoria UK was Hanover, but her son King Edward VII UK was House of Saxe-Coburg & Gotha (aka Windsor).

When Parliaments approved the change to allow for females to ascent the throne,
they should also accept that the ruling house name will change with her descendants, otherwise it “forces” the man marrying the regnant queen or future regnant queen to change his name and/or his off-springs cannot bear his name.

There is still no equality whichever way you look at it – why is Daniel not a Crown Prince, like Mary of Denmark is a Crown Princess.

I hope that when Queen Estelle ascends the thrown, she will go in as a house of Westling.
I also hope that Charles will change to house of Mountbatten.


JR76 09-05-2017 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fijiro (Post 2015936)
When the reign goes through a queen regnant, the reigning house’s name changes when her descendants succeed her. That’s why in the UK, for example, we had Tudor, Stuart, Hanover, Saxe-Coburg & Gotha.Queen Victoria UK was Hanover, but her son King Edward VII UK was House of Saxe-Coburg & Gotha (aka Windsor).

When Parliaments approved the change to allow for females to ascent the throne,
they should also accept that the ruling house name will change with her descendants, otherwise it “forces” the man marrying the regnant queen or future regnant queen to change his name and/or his off-springs cannot bear his name.

There is still no equality whichever way you look at it – why is Daniel not a Crown Prince, like Mary of Denmark is a Crown Princess.

I hope that when Queen Estelle ascends the thrown, she will go in as a house of Westling.
I also hope that Charles will change to house of Mountbatten.

I'm 99.9℅ sure that the Swedish Parliament have more pressing issues to keep them occupied than if Estelle is a Wrestling or a Bernadotte.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:19 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018
Jelsoft Enterprises