Dutch Line of Succession

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria

Revisiting my first question from last year's discussion, are there any inferences at all (even from unofficial sources such as the gossip press) regarding Queen Juliana's or Queen Beatrix's feelings about the changes to the laws on female succession?

Not that I am aware of; my guess would be that everyone was in agreement because what was accepted doesn't seem controversial at all (especially if we go back in time).

Regarding 1963: it must have made a lot more sense to everyone that Beatrix' children would be ahead of their aunt in line of succession also if she would pass before her mother.

Regarding 1983: there was no impact, followed a European trend AND as was said before: the royal family and the country were used to female monarchs.

It is interesting, how because the monarch's family has had children of the same gender since Wilhelmina, there was nobody to replace an older sibling. And even in the case of the three kings Willem, their (living) sons were older than their daughters.

[Eskimo]

Silly question but wouldn’t Beatrix be in the 1st line of consanguinity to her son? So if something happened to everyone in the line and she was still living wouldn’t the throne just go back to her?

[Duc_et_Pair]

Yes, the Oranges always have allowed female succession by lack of male successors, then the female successor is seen as a male and passes the House on to a new generation, but Wilhelmina was the only surviving child, Juliana was the only surviving child, Willem-Alexander is the eldest of males only, Catharina-Amalia is the eldest of females only. There has never been a male/female conflict of seniority.

Genealogically the most senior male of the youngest generation is Claus-Casimir, the only grandson of Queen Beatrix, but he would never have been King anyway, bypassing daughters of Willem-Alexander, bypassing daughters of Johan Friso and bypassing his own elder sister. Even before 1983 the succession was not male absolute.

Also in the period under the Kings Grand-Dukes (1813-1888) there never has been a daughter, genealogicly more senior than her siblings. With other words, without the change of the Constitution in 1983 the situation would exactly has been the same as now.

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by Eskimo

Silly question but wouldn’t Beatrix be in the 1st line of consanguinity to her son? So if something happened to everyone in the line and she was still living wouldn’t the throne just go back to her?

No, because she has abdicated the kingship and ceased to be a successor. As Queen Wilhelmina once said: "I am dead now" (constitutionally).

[Prinsara]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

Yes, the King, who outlived his first spouse and all his three sons, had lethargic and depressed moods in his last years, with moments of bad temper ("Russian blood" with reference to his mother Anna Pavlovna) and most likely had no energy to fight with his wife and the Nassau relatives to ensure his daughter to become Queen of the Netherlands as well Grand-Duchess of Luxembourg. The likelihood of another child was minimal. There even were rumours Wilhelmina was fathered by a courtier.

All of which is true, and yet in 1837 in Great Britain, William IV probably wasn’t in remotely better health, and yet there was still some officiality that his niece Victoria was sovereign and successor — as long as Queen Adelaide did not give birth to a posthumous heir. Either time period differences, cultural differences, or personal ones, but the situation has arisen.

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

Genealogically the most senior male of the youngest generation is Claus-Casimir, the only grandson of Queen Beatrix, but he would never have been King anyway, bypassing daughters of Willem-Alexander, bypassing daughters of Johan Friso and bypassing his own elder sister. Even before 1983 the succession was not male absolute.

It is true that the succession was never male-only. However, under the semi-Salic law before 1963, Catharina-Amalia would have been bypassed for her uncle Constantijn, or if he predeceased the King, her cousin Claus-Casimir.

If the rules in effect from 1922 to 1963 were applied, the current line of succession would be:

1. Constantijn
2. Claus-Casimir
3. Catharina-Amalia
4. Alexia
5. Ariane
6. Margriet
7. Eloise
8. Leonore

But if the rules in effect from 1963 to 1983 were applied, the current line of succession would be:

1. Catharina-Amalia
2. Alexia
3. Ariane
4. Constantijn
5. Claus-Casimir
6. Eloise
7. Leonore
8. Margriet

[lucien]

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria

Revisiting my first question from last year's discussion, are there any inferences at all (even from unofficial sources such as the gossip press) regarding Queen Juliana's or Queen Beatrix's feelings about the changes to the laws on female succession?

Revisiting my answer to your traditional question.No,there wasn´t.

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria

It is true that the succession was never male-only. However, under the semi-Salic law before 1963, Catharina-Amalia would have been bypassed for her uncle Constantijn, or if he predeceased the King, her cousin Claus-Casimir.

If the rules in effect from 1922 to 1963 were applied, the current line of succession would be:

1. Constantijn
2. Claus-Casimir
3. Catharina-Amalia
4. Alexia
5. Ariane
6. Margriet
7. Eloise
8. Leonore

But if the rules in effect from 1963 to 1983 were applied, the current line of succession would be:

1. Catharina-Amalia
2. Alexia
3. Ariane
4. Constantijn
5. Claus-Casimir
6. Eloise
7. Leonore
8. Margriet

Until 1963 female successors could only succeed if there were no male successors left.

Between 1963 and 1983 female successors could succeed when there was no male successor within the same degree of consanguity.

From 1983 onwards the primogeniture, regardless the gender, determines the succession.

I interpret it like this:

1 degree of consanguity to the King:
Catharina-Amalia
Alexia
Ariane

2 degrees of consanguity to the King:
Constantijn

Before 1963 - Constantijn is the Heir
Between 1963 and 1983 - Amalia is the Heir
After 1983 - Amalia is the Heir

Had Amalia a younger brother between 1963 and 1983, he would have been the Heir because he was a male successor within the same degree of consanguity. Let me say: alike Elizabeth and Victoria having precedence above uncles.

[Duc_et_Pair]

The revised article from 1963:

Article 11

In the event of succession, the Crown passes:

To the descendants of the last deceased King, with sons taking precedence over daughters and then the eldest child preceded by fulfillment according to the same rules;

In the absence of descendants of the last deceased King, in the same way, first the descendants the King's parents, then of the King's grandparents in the line of succession to the throne;

Insofar there is a relation to the last deceased King, not furtherer than three degrees of consanguinity.

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria

At least the change in 1963 had the potential to affect persons already in the line of succession - if Princess Beatrix had predeceased her mother Queen Juliana. Rather than Princess Margriet becoming the new heiress of the throne, according to the rule of semi-Salic primogeniture before 1963, the crown would have passed directly from Queen Juliana to Prince Willem-Alexander if Beatrix had predeceased her mother after 1963.

That's a good point. One might wonder then why, after two reigning queens and a regent, the change to the rules of succession in 1963 nonetheless maintained male preference in the same degree of descent.

Based on semi-salic primogeniture; why would a younger daughter be ahead of the son of the eldest daughter upon premature death of the elder of the two sisters?!

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by Somebody

Based on semi-salic primogeniture; why would a younger daughter be ahead of the son of the eldest daughter upon premature death of the elder of the two sisters?!

Yes, in 1963 it is about being the closest related to the deceased King with males have precedence over females in the same degree of consanguity.

Imagine Princess Beatrix only had a daughter and Princess Margriet had sons, still then Princess Beatrix' daughter (the heiress to the heiress) would have precedence.

Before 1963 Princess Margriet's son would have had precedence.

1.
Juliana

1.1.
Beatrix

1.1.1.
Beatrix' daughter (Heiress under the succession of 1963)

1.2.
Margriet

1.2.1.
Margriet's eldest son (Heir under the succession before 1963)

1.2.2.
Margriet's junior son

1.2.3.
Margriet's junior son

1.2.4.
Margriet's junior son

Etc.

With position 1.1.1. Beatrix' daughter is closer to Juliana than Margriet's eldest son on position 1.2.1. Had Beatrix also a junior son, then he would have bypassed his senior sister.

We can say: in 1963 the Dutch were inspired by the new Danish system, with Margrethe and her sisters coming before Knud and his children Ingolf, Christian and Elisabeth.

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by Somebody

Based on semi-salic primogeniture; why would a younger daughter be ahead of the son of the eldest daughter upon premature death of the elder of the two sisters?!

Because that was the law. The constitutional order of succession from 1922 to 1963 was

1. Male successors from the ruling patrilineal dynasty, i.e. the male descendants in male lineage from the most recent female monarch or monarch who succeeded through a female line (Articles 11 and 20)
2. Daughters of the most recent monarch (Article 12)
3. Daughters of sons of the most recent monarch (Article 13)
4. Sons of daughters of the most recent monarch (Article 13)
5. Daughters of daughters of the most recent monarch (Article 13)
6. Other individuals related to the most recent monarch through Queen Wilhelmina's lineage, with a limit of three degrees of consanguinity and nearer relatives taking precedence (Article 14)

11. Erfopvolging

De Kroon gaat bij erfopvolging over op Zijne zonen en verdere mannelijke uit mannen gekomen nakomelingen bij recht van eerstgeboorte, met dien verstande, dat bij vooroverlijden van een rechthebbende diens zonen of verdere mannelijke uit mannen gekomen nakomelingen op gelijke wijze in Zijne plaats treden en de Kroon nooit in eene jongere lijn of een jongeren tak overgaat, zoolang er in de oudere lijn of den ouderen tak zoodanige nakomeling wordt gevonden.

12. Dochters erven Kroon bij ontstentenis mannelijk opvolgers

Bij ontstentenis van opvolgers in het voorgaande artikel aangewezen, gaat de Kroon over op de oudste in leven zijnde dochter van den laatstoverleden Koning.

13. Troonopvolging bij ontstentenis dochters

Bij ontstentenis ook van dochters uit den laatstoverleden Koning gaat de Kroon over op de oudste in leven zijnde dochter van den oudsten zijner vooroverleden zoons, van wie dochters in leven zijn; bij ontstentenis van zoodanige dochters op den oudsten in leven zijnden zoon van de oudste zijner vooroverleden dochters, van wie zoons in leven zijn, en bij ontstentenis ook van zoodanige zoons op de oudste in leven zijnde dochter van de oudste zijner vooroverleden dochters, van wie dochters in leven zijn.

14. Troonopvolging bij ontstentenis kleindochters

Bij ontstentenis van een opvolger, krachtens een der drie voorgaande artikelen tot de Kroon gerechtigd, gaat deze over op den man of de vrouw, die den laatstoverleden Koning, in de lijn der afstamming van Hare Majesteit Koningin WILHELMINA, Prinses van Oranje-Nassau, het naast, doch niet verder dan in den derden graad van bloedverwantschap, bestaat.

Bij gelijken graad van bloedverwantschap hebben mannen boven vrouwen en heeft daarna de eerstgeborene den voorrang.

[...]

20. Bepalingen omtrent erfopvolging

Al de bepalingen omtrent de erfopvolging worden op de nakomelingen van den Koning, op wien krachtens een der artikelen 12, 13, 14, 18 of 19 de Kroon overgaat, van toepassing, in dier voege dat het nieuwe Stamhuis ten opzichte van die opvolging van hem zijn oorsprong neemt op gelijke wijze en met dezelfde gevolgen als het Huis van Oranje-Nassau dit volgens artikel 10 doet uit wijlen Koning WILLEM FREDERIK, Prins van Oranje-Nassau.

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

Imagine Princess Beatrix only had a daughter and Princess Margriet had sons, still then Princess Beatrix' daughter (the heiress to the heiress) would have precedence.

Before 1963 Princess Margriet's son would have had precedence.

Yes, but only during the reign of Queen Juliana, so that if both Beatrix and Margriet had passed away during their mother's reign, and the 1922 succession laws were unaltered, Juliana would have been succeeded by Margriet's son rather than Beatrix's hypothetical daughter.

However, so long as Beatrix lived to succeed her mother, Beatrix's daughter would have taken precedence over Margriet's son once Beatrix acceded to the throne.

On the other hand, if Beatrix (but not Margriet) were to predecease her mother, Queen Juliana would have been succeeded by Margriet rather than Beatrix's daughter, and Margriet's son would have become the crown prince upon his mother's accession to the throne.

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

To show "how close" the Orange-Nassaus are to the "that mad Reuß prince" some media claim that the Reuß family would be on the throne today, was Juliana not born.

That is not true, The Princes Reuß only came after the Sachsen-Weimar-Eisenach line would have no male dynasts anymore, descending from Princess Sophie of the Netherlands (aunt of Queen Wilhelmina):

The confusion probably arises because at the time of Princess Juliana's birth in 1909, the Reusses were for all practical purposes first in line to the Dutch throne. Sophie had only one child, Hereditary Grand Duke Carl August of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach, who in turn had only one child, Wilhelm Ernst, who was still childless.

As Carl August and Wilhelm Ernst were expected to succeed to the crown of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach, they would have effectively been disqualified from the Dutch throne, as the Dutch constitution included a prohibition on a union of crowns.

If Carl August or Wilhelm Ernst had had a daughter, my understanding is that she would have taken precedence over Sophie's daughters and their descendants. But at the time, they had none.

https://www.denederlandsegrondwet.nl...r/vi7df7i16bze

1922
Queen Wilhelmina

Successor Nr 1:
Princess Juliana of the Netherlands, Princess of Orange-Nassau, Herzogin zu Mecklenburg-Schwerin

Successor Nr 2:
No any successor. The Constitution of 1922 limited the successors to those no furterer related to the Sovereign than three degrees of consanguity.

The constitutional amendment of 1922 imposed the three-degree limit on descendants of princesses. Male-line males retained their succession rights no matter how how distantly they were related. Only in 1963 was the treatment of male and female lines of descent equalized (though brothers still took precedence before sisters).

But if Wilhelmina had remained childless, would Parliament have passed the same constitutional change in 1922? As you stated, that would have left the throne without an heir. Who would have been chosen by Parliament as successor in that case?

ETA: It seems that in 1922, prior to the changes to the law of succession, the person highest in the order of succession to the Dutch throne after Juliana who was neither German nor in direct line to a foreign throne was Prince Knud of Denmark (a descendant of Princess Louise of the Netherlands).

[CyrilVladisla]

Originally Posted by Henri M.

Unlike the British situation, the Dutch line of succession is limited to those who are related to the Sovereign, but no furtherer than three degrees of consanguity.

Imagine that Willem-Alexander is King now, then 8 people would be in the line of succession:

Related to His Majesty King Willem IV Alexander in 1 degree of consanguity:
1 - Her Royal Highness The Princess of Orange (Catharina-Amalia) child of The King
2 - Her Royal Highness Princess Alexia of the Netherlands, Princess of Orange-Nassau child of The King
3 - His (Her) Royal Highness the unborn Prince (Princess) of the Netherlands, Prince (Princess) of Orange-Nassau child of The King


Related to His Majesty King Willem IV Alexander in 2 degrees of consanguity:
4 - His Royal Highness Prince Constantijn of the Netherlands, Prince of Orange-Nassau, Jonkheer van Amsberg brother to The King

Related to His Majesty King Willem IV Alexander in 3 degrees of consanguity:
5 - the highborn lady Eloïse Countess of Orange-Nassau, Jonkvrouwe van Amsberg niece to The King
6 - the highborn lord Claus-Casimir Count of Orange-Nassau, Jonkheer van Amsberg nephew to The King
7 - the highborn lady Leonore Countess of Orange-Nassau, Jonkvrouwe van Amsberg niece to The King

8 - Her Royal Highness Princess Margriet of the Netherlands, Princess of Orange-Nassau, Princess of Lippe-Biesterfeld aunt to The King

When this line of succession was declared in 2006, Willem-Alexander was not yet king.
What I find interesting is that here he is referred to as King Willem IV Alexander.

[SLV]

Originally Posted by CyrilVladisla

When this line of succession was declared in 2006, Willem-Alexander was not yet king.

What I find interesting is that here he is referred to as King Willem IV Alexander.

Yes, it was expected he would go as Willem IV. Instead he went for his full name, so technically he is King Willem-Alexander I.