The United Kingdom - In order to succeed to the Brisitish Throne, one has to be a legitimate descendent from Electress Sophia of Hanover. Legitimised children remains inelegible. You can't be a Roman Catholic, or has ever been married to a Roman Catholic.
Spain - Only legitimate descendents of King Juan Carlos can succeed.
Denmark - Only descendents from King Christian X and Queen Alexandrine can succeed. Individuals born to unmarried dynasts or to former dynasts that married without royal permission, and their descendants, are excluded from the throne.
Sweden - Only legitimate Lutheran descendents of King Carl XVI Gustaf are entitled to succeed.
Norway - Only legitimate descendents from the reigning Monarch and his/her sibling can succeed.
The Netherlands - Only legitimate relatives of the Monarch can succeed.
Belgium - Only legitimate descendents from King Albert II can succeed.
Luxembourg - Only legitimate descendents from Grand Duke Henri can succeed.
Liechtenstein - Only male-line male descendents from the Princes of Liechtenstein can succeed.
Japan - Only male-line male descendents from Emperor Taisho can succeed.
Brazil - Only legitimate Brazilian descendents of Emperor Pedro I can succeed. People born to former Dynasts are excluded from the Throne.
I know nothing about other Lines of Succession, but seems that only Monaco accept retroactive legitimisation. They like to be different.
Errr... there is some mistake here, or I didn't explain myself properly.
I know only legimitate descendants can succeed in every country. What I mean is I thought everywhere worked like monaco and reatroactive legitimacy applied.
You say that in Spain only legitimate descents can inherit, and of course you are right. But retroactive legitimacy does exists, exactly like in Monaco.
Also, in France, when they had kings, retroative legimimacy was accepted.
It's very easy to understand why. Those were traditional catholic monachies. Once you marry the mother of your children in church, your children become legitimate, in the eyes of the catholice church they are the same as childron born after the wedding.
That's why in traditional catholic countries, retroactive legimimacy has historically always applied.
I just wonder if it works different in other countries as if anyone knows of any case where retroactive legitimacy did not apply, because as far as I knew retroactive legitimacy was the rule in all royal and nobiliary houses.
Thanks!
It's not that it's a Catholic thing, it's that it's a new concept (retroactive legitimacy that is). If a country introduces its retroactive legitimacy laws after it introduces it's succession laws then the legitimacy laws don't apply to the succession.
Oh, no! It is not a new concept at all! I could tell you many stories about retroactive legimacy in 16th and 17th century europe!
It's a concept that has always existed, maybe as old as monarcny itself.
Thus, in Britain the concept of legitimacy can be applied retroactively, but a child born out of wedlock, regardless of his or her parents' later marital status, is not in the line if succession.
Thank you for your explanations about Britain and the Lascelles. It was very interesting.
Maybe modern Britain is an exception? Or maybe it's a catholic/non catholic thing?
Because in mediterranean Europe it has always existed and retroactively legitimated children always could inherit thrones. Actually, Monaco probably just follows the french tradition...
I found it interesting myself. Granted, I'm basing the understanding of the line of succession on what Wikipedia says about it, so the whole idea could be entirely off base.
I think you both are right, Ish and juliette. I guess the british norm is a traditional norm, from times when "Confirmation" was a more significant sacrament.
Nowadays, thought it is as juliette says a "nearly forgotten" sacrament in most catholic countries, and one many people just forget about.
I think I said it in another post: there are many babies, sick children and pregnant women coming in and out of the hospital (which is exclusively a maternal/children hospital), but you are right, it's allowed and they can do it.
Well those pregnant women and children are also exposed to all the diesel fumes of the cars stopping at the hospital door where the casiraghis are celebrating, and diesel fumes are much more dangerous to our lungs than tiny cigarettes in open air!
