If Charles dies before the queen

[Tatiana Maria]

No, I guess it depends on your perspective. As male-line children of an approved marriage always were princes and princesses

No, only children of persons in the the line of succession were princes and princesses. Prince Carl's marriage to Elsa von Rosen was approved by the King, but it contravened the ban on marriage to Swedish private men's daughters in the Act of Succession and he lost his place in the line of succession. His daughter was never a princess.

Under the pre-1980 Act of Succession, neither Carl Philip after marrying Sofia nor Madeleine, nor their children, would have had a place in the line of succession.

So, the rule that all persons in the line of succession were members of the Royal House was applied consistently from the 18th century until 2019.

(of course, previously his marriage might not have been approved but that's different than also making children of a princess - whose father is untitled).

That their father is untitled is another example of slimming down - until the marriages of the King's children, the spouse of a person in the line of succession was automatically a princess. (Edited to correct the facts, with thanks to Somebody.)

First extending it and then retracting some of it within 10 years doesn't sound like slimming down to me.

Within 40 years. The abolition of male-only succession and the abolition of the marriage equality laws both took place in 1980; the slimming down of the Royal House took place in 2019.

 

[sarahedwards2]

The letters patent that Queen Elizabeth II issued were solely to make her great grandchildren born to William (heir to the heir) HRH Prince/ss. It did not affect any of the Queen's other great grandchildren. This was done due to the amendment of the Act of Succession to the Crown bill presented in Parliament in 2011 and ratified into law in 2013 before any Cambridge child was born.

I’m still confused as to how the LP’s were necessary, seeing as all of George V’s children were Princes and Princesses during Victoria’s time.

 

[amaryllus]

Why? The more working royals, the more cost to the public. so a small RF is cheaper ad in in todays world more popular...[/


When your entire monarchy gets to a point it can share an apartment and fit into an SUV it is indeed very cheap

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I’m still confused as to how the LP’s were necessary, seeing as all of George V’s children were Princes and Princesses during Victoria’s time.

Because King George V issued new, more restrictive rules in 1917.

https://www.heraldica.org/topics/britain/prince_highness.htm

 

[Denville]

Why? The more working royals, the more cost to the public. so a small RF is cheaper ad in in todays world more popular...[/


When your entire monarchy gets to a point it can share an apartment and fit into an SUV it is indeed very cheap

I doubt if it is all that cheap but in some ways less expensive than a presidency.. but the public in most monarchies want to cut costs, ntot to have to pay expenses and security for several people. They would prefer that RF's were reduced to the monarch, his partner, and the heir and his/her partner, with maybe occasional help from siblings.

 

[Somebody]

No, only children of persons in the the line of succession were princes and princesses. Prince Carl's marriage to Elsa von Rosen was approved by the King, but it contravened the ban on marriage to Swedish private men's daughters in the Act of Succession and he lost his place in the line of succession. His daughter was never a princess.

Under the pre-1980 Act of Succession, neither Carl Philip after marrying Sofia nor Madeleine, nor their children, would have had a place in the line of succession.

Hadn't thought about that. Wouldn't that have applied to Victoria's children as well? Or would it only apply to Swedish brides and not bridegrooms?

So, the rule that all persons in the line of succession were members of the Royal House was applied consistently from the 18th century until 2019.

Given that the British royal family doesn't make a distinction between royal house and royal family; I thought we were talking about titles not about membership of a royal house.

That their father is untitled is another example of slimming down - previously, the spouse of a person in the line of succession was automatically a princess or (in Daniel's case) prince.

That's a matter of perspective. The fact that there was discussion about what title Jonas would get (as the first to marry a princess with succession rights) makes clear that he wouldn't automatically become a prince of Sweden - unlike Sofia who did become princess. So, there was no rule that all spouses of a person in line of succession would be prince/princess. The rule was that all female spouses did.

Within 40 years. The abolition of male-only succession and the abolition of the marriage equality laws both took place in 1980; the slimming down of the Royal House took place in 2019.

I see where you are coming from. Indeed the extension in succession to the throne took place in 1980. However, that's not what the discussion was about (at least from my perspective) - as in Britain nobody is discussing to limit the succession to only Charles' off-spring for example; it is about titles and expectations or royal work; the extension of that happened in the last 10 years (for Sweden).

But maybe we should continue the discussion elsewhere (if you'd like to) as this is no longer about what may happen if Charles dies before the queen.

 

[Mbruno]

So far in Denmark there are only grandchildren in the male line who are in line of the succession. We will have to wait and see what happens with Isabella's children once she marries and has children.

Yes, you are right. However, Isabellla's children will be in the line of succession unless Isabella marries without consent. In that case, following Danish precedent, her children should be Princes and Princesses "to Denmark" and probably HHs, being in collateral line.


I am more curious to know how Prince Joachim's grandchildren will be styled , assuming they are also still in the line of succession. Will there be a cutoff point for HHs or will the number of Danish princes and princesses just keep growing from generation to generation?

The Swedish family did not slim down the monarchy but largely increased it by allowing Madeleine's children to become princes and princesses. So, I don't think they are a good example. The Norwegian royal family has truly been slimming down the monarch (to a level that might leave Haakon and Ingrid-Alexandra from a young age the two main figures who have to carry almost all the load). So, I wouldn't necessary recommend there tactics either.

It is not clear how future grandchildren of the Swedish monarch will be styled, e.g. Oscar's children when Victoria is Queen.


A possible interpretation is that CP's and Madeleine's children have retained Prince/Princess as a courtesy prefix because, with the exception of Julian, they were all born as HRH Prince/Princess and had the HRH later taken from them. An alternative interpretation, however, is that all persons in the line of succession will continue to carry the prefix Prince/Princess (including Oscar's children for example), but won't have the style HRH, which will be restricted to the monarch's and the heir's children.


I personally have a similar doubt with respect to Belgian titles. It is clear now that the title of Prince/Princess of Belgium and the style of HRH will apply in the future to persons born as children or grandchildren of the monarch, or as children or grandchildren of the heir (who are already a lot!). However, we don't know if other people in the line of succession who are not included in the categories above (e.g. Prince Laurent's grandchildren) will continue to carry the prefix Prince/Princess without the style HRH, which is also a possible interpretation of the Royal Decree of 2015.


At least the UK has clear rules on who should or should not be an HRH, even though those rules are gender-based.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I see where you are coming from. Indeed the extension in succession to the throne took place in 1980. However, that's not what the discussion was about (at least from my perspective) - as in Britain nobody is discussing to limit the succession to only Charles' off-spring for example; it is about titles and expectations or royal work; the extension of that happened in the last 10 years (for Sweden).

In Sweden, it was settled convention that titles and expectations for royal funding/work were tied to succession rights for centuries until 2019, so from my perspective it was the succession rights which were extended (to females and their descendants, and to descendants of males by "unequal" marriages) in 1980, not the rights to titles or work expectations.

It was also technically Parliament, not the Royal Family, which extended the succession, though the King was supportive of both changes (albeit he opposed complete gender equality).

That's a matter of perspective. The fact that there was discussion about what title Jonas would get (as the first to marry a princess with succession rights) makes clear that he wouldn't automatically become a prince of Sweden - unlike Sofia who did become princess. So, there was no rule that all spouses of a person in line of succession would be prince/princess. The rule was that all female spouses did.

You are right, and I will correct my post. So, the rule that all spouses of persons in line of succession would be princess had ceased to apply when the King's children married (Sofia becoming a princess was also not automatic), and the rule did not need to be gender-specific since, while it was in effect, all spouses of persons in the line of succession were female.

Given that the British royal family doesn't make a distinction between royal house and royal family; I thought we were talking about titles not about membership of a royal house.

[...]

But maybe we should continue the discussion elsewhere (if you'd like to) as this is no longer about what may happen if Charles dies before the queen.

In Sweden titles and membership of the Royal House are linked, so I don't think they can be separated.

The majority of this thread has gone beyond the titular topic of discussion , but yes, I will respond to your other comments on Sweden in the Swedish forum.

Titles of the Swedish RF and Changes 2019
Swedish Line of Succession