Swedish Line of Succession


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
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.
 
Last edited:
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.
 
Last edited:
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 .
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
So why not a hyphenated surname? Many women do this...it honors both names.


LaRae
 
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.

 
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.
 
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.

Are you aware that the procreation process doesn't discriminate on surname? My DNA is 50/50 of my parents. Surnames and patrilineal succession is a social construct - that's it. Using a surname to prove "pure lineage" of a head of a family is ridiculous and insulting.

Twist it how you like, but dynastic procreation is the same as non-dynastic procreation. Prince CP's children have the exact same amount of Bernadotte genes as Estelle, Oscar, Leonore and Nicolas. I.e. 50%
 
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).

For centuries, the descendants of practically every queen regnant in Europe have sustained the name of her house unmodified or within a compound name. If I am not mistaken, Queen Victoria of the U.K. was the lone exception over the past three to four centuries.

"[...] Yes, I know that people change their names so they can pretend to be Bernadottes, [...]"
No name change has been applied to the Crown Princess's children (nor the remainder of the King's grandchildren). By law, the child of parents having a joint surname (i.e. Bernadotte) takes the same surname from birth:

1 § Barn till föräldrar med gemensamt efternamn förvärvar genom födelsen det namnet.

Namnlag (1982:670) Svensk författningssamling 1982:1982:670 t.o.m. SFS 2016:203 - Riksdagen

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.

A number of these surnames derive from a female line. Prince Daniel for instance is the great-grandson in agnatic line of Brita Westling and Anders Andersson.

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?

As noted by xenobia, the "double standard" in the name laws in Sweden gives preference to the maternal name. Had Princess Sofia not taken the surname Bernadotte, Prince Carl Philip would effectively have needed permission from his spouse to give his name to his offspring. The Crown Princess and Princess Madeleine would not.

Har föräldrarna olika efternamn när barnet föds och är andra stycket inte tillämpligt, anses barnet genom födelsen ha förvärvat det av föräldrarnas efternamn som anmäls till Skatteverket inom tre månader efter födelsen. Anmälan kan i stället avse ett namn som någon av föräldrarna senast har burit som ogift. Görs inte någon anmälan i fall som nu har sagts, anses barnet genom födelsen ha förvärvat moderns efternamn.

Namnlag (1982:670) Svensk författningssamling 1982:1982:670 t.o.m. SFS 2016:203 - Riksdagen
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.
 
Last edited:
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.

But for Daniel's children the name Westling was not appreciated?
Pure double standards.
 
Are you aware that the procreation process doesn't discriminate on surname? My DNA is 50/50 of my parents. Surnames and patrilineal succession is a social construct - that's it. Using a surname to prove "pure lineage" of a head of a family is ridiculous and insulting.

Twist it how you like, but dynastic procreation is the same as non-dynastic procreation. Prince CP's children have the exact same amount of Bernadotte genes as Estelle, Oscar, Leonore and Nicolas. I.e. 50%

Of course there is always a father and always a mother and of course anyone's DNA is 50% - 50%. But that is not what happens here. The question is: who is fooling who.

Take the Houses of Orange-Nassau and of Nassau. Their "founding father" Dudo von Laurenburg, Count of Nassau lived from 1060 - 1123. Century after century the dynasty procreated in the male lineage. Century after century females in the dynasty married into other families and their offspring was regarded as part of the family in which they married.

In 1962, Wilhelmina, the very last Orange-Nassau died. In 1985 Charlotte, the very last Nassau died. At present the House of Nassau will become totally extinct as Elisabeth Clotilde von Rintelen born Gräfin von Nassau-Merenberg is the very last alive, 75 years old.

But suddenly Juliana von Mecklenburg, Jean de Bourbon de Parme, Beatrix zur Lippe-Biesterfeld, Henri de Bourbon de Parme, Willem-Alexander von Amsberg are seen as "Nassau". A bigger masquerade is not possible.

In the genealogy of the House de Bourbon de Parme, Jean and Henri are direct and legitime male agnates of the Maison de Bourbon. But in the genealogy of the "House of Nassau", the very same Bourbons are suddenly also agnates of the House of Nassau. Please, spare me the laughter. There is a big inconsequence in this whole logic. And as always, with the political correct brigade here, we play along with the theatre. Phantasialand is in Brühl, but seems to have expanded.

For Luxembourg, Denmark and the Netherlands at least the surname of the father has never been "hidden". Juliana was a Duchess of Mecklenburg, Jean and Henri are Princes de Bourbon de Parme, Beatrix is a Princess zur Lippe-Biesterfeld, Willem-Alexander is a Jonkheer van Amsberg, Frederik is a Count de Monpezat. So their paternal "contribution" remained visible.

But where is "Zorreguieta" in this? And where is "Tjessem Hoiby" in this? And where is "Westling" in this? It is just one big and inconsequent vaudeville. I strive for factuality. It is as it is. Do it then with two surnames and -for the sake of continuity of centuries of tradition- with the father's one always as first one:

Jean de Bourbon de Parme - de Nassau
Ingrid-Alexandra Glucksborg - Tjessem-Hoiby
Estelle Westling - Bernadotte
Christian de Laborde de Monpezat - Donaldson
Catharina-Amalia von Amsberg - Zorreguieta
Leonor de Borbón - Ortiz
Elisabeth von Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha - d'Udekem d'Acoz

50% - 50% mom and dad
100 % the whole DNA
Always both names
No discrimination
No who-is-fooling-who
Voilà
 
Last edited:
I'll have to look into the quotes from the Swedish laws regarding last names. Quite instinctively I feel that those referred here are for children of unmarried couples and not those born to a married couple. I myself carried my mother's last name for a few months before my parents had it changed to that of my father.
 
But for Daniel's children the name Westling was not appreciated?
Pure double standards.

It's not a question of if it's appreciated or not. Daniel took his wifes last name when they married. It would be very strange in Sweden if the children don't have the same name as their parents. Both Daniel and Victoria are Bernadottes, just like Estelle and Oscar.
 
I'll have to look into the quotes from the Swedish laws regarding last names. Quite instinctively I feel that those referred here are for children of unmarried couples and not those born to a married couple. I myself carried my mother's last name for a few months before my parents had it changed to that of my father.

There are married couples who have different last names. If the parents have different last names (gifta eller sambo eller inte alls ihop öht), they need to report to Skatteverket what name the child will have. I don't know how the laws regarding this was in the 70's when I (and I guess you) were born, but if I understand my friends, who just had their second child and have different last names, this is how it works today.
 
Carl Philip is no more Bernadotte than Victoria. His children have no more right to bear Bernadotte's name trhan her children.
 
The Sweden Monarchy will continue absolutely through Crown Princess Victoria and then Princess Estelle.
Even though Daniel changed his name to Bernadotte, the Bernadotte family male-line descendants doesn’t go through him.
 
Carl Philip is no more Bernadotte than Victoria. His children have no more right to bear Bernadotte's name trhan her children.

That's a brash statement and factually untrue. When starting with Alexander and now Gabriel, the family tree can be traced all the way back to the beginning of the House of Bernadotte. It's an unbroken line.

Which reminds me of what Prince Joachim of Denmark has apparently once said around the time of his eldest son's birth. That he wants to be the start of a very long male bloodline. With three sons, his wish is for now granted and will probably also be in the future. But that's not a discussion for here.

The Sweden Monarchy will continue absolutely through Crown Princess Victoria and then Princess Estelle.
Even though Daniel changed his name to Bernadotte, the Bernadotte family male-line descendants doesn’t go through him.

First - by present-day law, yes. But factually that isn't the Bernadotte dynasty. That's for her brother and nephews (and uncle and cousins).
Second - true. Simply because Daniel's patrilineal bloodline is Westling.
 
Fof the bloodline i respectfully disagree, but i do agree that the Y-chromosome of Bernadotte is still present from the founder of the dynasty to the current and next generation, and that's something not all european RF's can say..
 
Carl Philip is no more Bernadotte than Victoria. His children have no more right to bear Bernadotte's name trhan her children.

Well this does not surprise me at all. It is waiting for the time that the title of "prince" and "princess" will be deemed undesireable because it concludes the gender of the person and maybe the person his/her/it self has not yet concluded "what" he/she/it is?

When in all European monarchies and aristocrat families the offspring of females were seen as part of the family they married into then it is of course very fancy to throw it all upside down and deny it.

Oscar II never belonged to the House of Orange-Nassau because of his mother Louise.
Gustaf V never belonged to the House of Nassau because of his mother Sofia.
Gustaf VI never belonged to the House of Baden because of his mother Victoria.
Carl XVI Gustaf never belonged to the House of Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha because of his mother Sibylla.

Always and ever the male lineage was continued, as is the case with Carl Philip and his offspring, all Bernadottes indeed. In the cases of Victoria and Madeleine an intervention was needed so that their offspring would not be Westlings or O'Neills. In Victoria's case because Daniel changed his name into Bernadotte. In Madeleine's case because her children were registered as Bernadotte and not as O'Neill.

It is all okay by me. It is a big Phantasialand. We all know it. But we close the eyes for it. After all: the political correctness brigade might slash you for telling the truth, to say as it is.

When Catharina-Amalia von Amsberg marries a Karl-Heinz Schmidt, it is no Amsberg, it is no Schmidt, then "of course" their children will be Orange-Nassaus. Jajaja. It is almost magic! And when Estelle Westling marries a Nils Johansson, it is no Westling, it is no Johansson, then "of course" their children will be Bernadotte. Sure. When will the show "do" Las Vegas?

:whistling:
 
Last edited:
Well said, Duc_et_Pair. There are a lot of Royal Houses today whose names are still being used, but who are factually defunct for ages.
I rest my case on this subject.
 
The name of a house is obviously not unbreakably linked to the Y-chromosome, imo the royals themselves have come to terms with that long ago :flowers:
 
In the cases of Victoria and Madeleine an intervention was needed so that their offspring would not be Westlings or O'Neills. In Victoria's case because Daniel changed his name into Bernadotte. In Madeleine's case because her children were registered as Bernadotte and not as O'Neill.

It was the offspring of Carl Philip who needed "intervention" to be Bernadottes. The offspring of his sisters would have been Bernadottes in any case, without the need for registration or Prince Daniel's name change.

Har föräldrarna olika efternamn när barnet föds och är andra stycket inte tillämpligt, anses barnet genom födelsen ha förvärvat det av föräldrarnas efternamn som anmäls till Skatteverket inom tre månader efter födelsen. Anmälan kan i stället avse ett namn som någon av föräldrarna senast har burit som ogift. Görs inte någon anmälan i fall som nu har sagts, anses barnet genom födelsen ha förvärvat moderns efternamn.

Namnlag (1982:670) Svensk författningssamling 1982:1982:670 t.o.m. SFS 2016:203 - Riksdagen

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'll have to look into the quotes from the Swedish laws regarding last names. Quite instinctively I feel that those referred here are for children of unmarried couples and not those born to a married couple. I myself carried my mother's last name for a few months before my parents had it changed to that of my father.

This is the text of the Name Act of (Edited: from 1983 until 2017). :flowers: Its provision "Förvärv av efternamn genom födelsen", as quoted by my previous post, applies to children of married couples as well as unmarried couples.

Namnlag (1982:670) Svensk författningssamling 1982:1982:670 t.o.m. SFS 2016:203 - Riksdagen

Granting that I do not know when you were born, the Act entered into force on January 1, 1983.


That's a brash statement and factually untrue. When starting with Alexander and now Gabriel, the family tree can be traced all the way back to the beginning of the House of Bernadotte. It's an unbroken line.

[…] Simply because Daniel's patrilineal bloodline is Westling.
Kellin's statement was true; the right to bear the Bernadotte name is determined by law rather than male bloodline.

In addition, there is no unbroken male bloodline. Prince Alexander and Prince Gabriel trace the name Bernadotte back to Germaine deu Bernadotte, the great-great-great-grandmother of King Carl XIV Johan. The Westling name is traced back to Brita Westling, the great-grandmother of Prince Daniel.
 
Last edited:
:previous: By a law that has not been in use for that long yet. And count out the female consorts of back in the day who were relieved to (finally) have given birth to a male heir so the dynasty could be continued. That's the bottom line here. I am not talking about present-day laws. I am talking about procreation and customs of the day. The girls were not important (enough), there was jubilation over a male birth.
Dynasty-wise it's like this:
Carl XVI Gustaf > Carl Philip > Alexander and Gabriel
Haakon VII of Norway > Olav > Harald V > Sverre Magnus
Leopold II of Belgium (don't know his predecessors by heart) > Baudouin > Albert > Philippe > Gabriël and Emmanuel / Laurent > Nicolas and Aymeric.
And lots more of examples.

You might want to take a look at the Bernadotte family tree at kungahuset.se, it does show a male line tracing all the way back.

But I feel we're running around in circles and I frankly don't feel it's worth the discussion any longer. My opinion is of the same post I started with from another message board. It's strictly spoken and how it worked for ages. Sans modern times. Now I am truly done.
 
Last edited:
Here we go: (Ive deleted content not related to what were discussing)
According to the Law (1982:670)
Förvärv av efternamn genom födelsen
1 § Barn till föräldrar med gemensamt efternamn förvärvar genom födelsen det namnet. Children born to parents with a common surname will aquire said name at birth.

Har föräldrarna olika efternamn när barnet föds och är andra stycket inte tillämpligt, anses barnet genom födelsen ha förvärvat det av föräldrarnas efternamn som anmäls till Skatteverket inom tre månader efter födelsen. If the parents carry different surnames at the time of birth the child, and the second paragraph isnt appliable, the child will aquire the name reported to the Tax Office within three months after the birth. Görs inte någon anmälan i fall som nu har sagts, anses barnet genom födelsen ha förvärvat moderns efternamn. If no name have been reported within said time period the child is presumed to have aquired the surname of the mother.
This basically means that the child automatically aquires the name of its parents if they share a surname, if they have different names (marriage status not important) the child gets the name reported within 3 months or if no report the surname of the mother.

However this law was abolished 1/7 2017 and replaced with Law (2016:1013) which states that:
4 § När ett barn har fötts ska barnet ges ett efternamn.
4 § When a child is born it shall receive a surname:

Barnets efternamn får vara
The childs surname can be
1. ett efternamn som föräldrarna eller någon av dem bär,
1. a surname carried by one or both of the parents,

5 § En ansökan om förvärv av det efternamn ett barn ska ges enligt 4 § ska göras inom tre månader från barnets födelse.
5§ An application about aquiring the surname a child should be given according to 4§ shall be made within 3 months after the time of birth.

Om det inte görs någon ansökan inom den tid som anges i första stycket, förvärvar barnet det efternamn som den förälder som har fött barnet bär eller, om den föräldern har avlidit, det efternamn som den föräldern bar vid sin död.
If no application is made with the period of time stated in the first paragraph the child aquires the name of the parent that gave birth to it or if that parent is deceased the name carried at the time of death

This new law basically states that the child can carry any of the surnames of its parents but that if a name hasnt been reported to the Tax Office within three months after the time of birth the child will be given the surname of the parent that gave birth to it.
According to both the old and the new laws all the children born to Victoria and Carl Philip are entitled to carry the name Bernadotte since the two mothers both carry said surname.
 
Last edited:
Dynasty-wise it's like this:
Carl XVI Gustaf > Carl Philip > Alexander and Gabriel
Dynasty-wise Alexander's and Gabriel's children might not be RF members in future.
They may become counts or even commoners. They won't continue the dynasty unless one of their descendants will marry one of the Estelle's descendants.

Dynasty still exists through Victoria, she is a daughter of her father. She's not adopted.
 
Last edited:
http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f22/swedish-line-of-succession-12487-6.html#post2016232

Thank you for translating, JR76! You are quite correct, I neglected to notice that the Law of 2016:1013 repealed the old law which was in force when the firstborn child was born to Crown Princess Victoria, Prince Carl Philip, and Princess Madeleine respectively. I see that the preference given to the maternal surname endures in the new law.


[...] And count out the female consorts of back in the day who were relieved to (finally) have given birth to a male heir so the dynasty could be continued. That's the bottom line here. I am not talking about present-day laws. I am talking about procreation and customs of the day. The girls were not important (enough), there was jubilation over a male birth.

[...]

You might want to take a look at the Bernadotte family tree at kungahuset.se, it does show a male line tracing all the way back.

[...]

Alexander and Gabriel do trace their patrilineal line back to the first monarch from the house of Bernadotte: King Carl XIV Johan. However, he was a descendant of a female Bernadotte.

Yes, it is true that in olden days, only males were permitted to be heirs (between 1719 and 1979) and females were deemed less important.


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?

There was a special provision to the Law of 1979:935.

Övergångsbestemmelse till lagen 1979:935

Denna lag träder i kraft den 1 januari 1980. Hans kungl. höghet hertigen av Halland, prins Bertil, skall ha successionsrätt till tronen efter Konung Carl XVI Gustaf och dennes efterkommande.
 
Back
Top Bottom