Monarchs that could in some way succeed to other thrones

[The Stuart Runaway]

Just started watching The Crown and it just occurred to me, although Prince Phillip renounced his foreign citizenship after marrying Elizabeth II, that technically, King Charles (as he is now) is line to the Danish throne. Probably quite a fair few places after Margethe II, but I thought this was interesting. Harald V of Norway is I think 63 places behind Prince William as far as the British throne is concerned, and I'm sure Margarethe II is in the British succession somewhere. Oh the tangled web that European royalty weaves!

 

[Alison H]

King Felipe is somewhere in the British line of succession, through his descent from the first Princess Beatrice, as is King Carl Gustaf through his descent from Prince Arthur, as are the Romanian royals through Prince Alfred. Felipe must also be in the line of succession for the Danish throne.

 

[CyrilVladisla]

Charles I of Spain was King of Spain from 1516 to 1556. He was the grandson of King Ferdinand V and Queen Isabella I of Spain.
Charles was also Holy Roman Emperor Charles V from 1519 to 1556. He was the grandson of Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian I.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

King Felipe is somewhere in the British line of succession, through his descent from the first Princess Beatrice, as is King Carl Gustaf through his descent from Prince Arthur, as are the Romanian royals through Prince Alfred. Felipe must also be in the line of succession for the Danish throne.

King Felipe cannot be in the succession for the British throne because he’s Catholic.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

The Duke of Edinburgh's renunciation aside, Denmark's 1953 Act of Succession limits the line of succession to the throne to descendants of King Christian X and Queen Alexandrine.

https://www.stm.dk/_p_12711.html

The other monarchies of Europe have more reasonable lines of succession than the United Kingdom. The UK is the only European monarchy whose succession laws are so blatantly inappropriate for the 21st century as to grant foreign royalty the right to become King or Queen of the UK.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

The Duke of Edinburgh's renunciation aside, Denmark's 1953 Act of Succession limits the line of succession to the throne to descendants of King Christian X and Queen Alexandrine.

https://www.stm.dk/_p_12711.html

The other monarchies of Europe have more reasonable lines of succession than the United Kingdom. The UK is the only European monarchy whose succession laws are so blatantly inappropriate for the 21st century as to grant foreign royalty the right to become King or Queen of the UK.

How is it wrong? The majority of those people don’t have a chance anyways so it’s interesting from a historic and genealogical point of view. You can’t really compare the Swedish or Norwegian for example because those thrones aren’t as old the BRF. The Norwegian royals might have been selected by the Norwegian population, but they are literally an offshoot of the Danish monarchy, the Swedish one is of French origins.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

How is it wrong? The majority of those people don’t have a chance anyways so it’s interesting from a historic and genealogical point of view.

The shared family history and genealogy can and would continue to exist and be of interest without foreign royalty being preferred over UK citizens as UK head of state.

You can’t really compare the Swedish or Norwegian for example because those thrones aren’t as old the BRF. The Norwegian royals might have been selected by the Norwegian population, but they are literally an offshoot of the Danish monarchy, the Swedish one is of French origins.

The Swedish and Norwegian thrones date to the Middle Ages, like the English and Scottish thrones, and they long predate the united British throne. I believe you are referring to the anciennity of the present dynasties, but foreign royalty descended from those "younger" dynasties are not currently in line to the Scandinavian thrones, either.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

The shared family history and genealogy can and would continue to exist and be of interest without foreign royalty being preferred over UK citizens as UK head of state.




The Swedish and Norwegian thrones date to the Middle Ages, like the English and Scottish thrones, and they long predate the united British throne. I believe you are referring to the anciennity of the present dynasties, but foreign royalty descended from those "younger" dynasties are not currently in line to the Scandinavian thrones, either.

How are U.K citizens going to be bothered about this? The real role regarding leadership is the prime minister not the monarch. Yes the monarch is “head of state” but it’s not the same. If there was a serious issue then maybe they might abolish the monarchy and create a republic, but it’s not a serious one now.

The dynasties in Sweden and Norway are younger and smaller and yes I’m referring to the dynasties. The vast of majority of people in the BRF succession are untitled, some of them are British aristocrats, others are descendants of deposed foreign royalty, others are gentry and some are commoners. Plus most of the reigning monarchs who have succession rights are over 50 and already have thrones and won’t live to claim to the British throne.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I've moved my response to the more suitable Line of Succession to the British Throne thread, here:

If you have polling data, I would be interested. But even the prospect of certain members of the British royal family becoming king or queen is currently controversial. I find it impossible to believe that UK citizens would all be "unbothered" by having just any foreign royal, or foreign private citizen, or British private citizen whom the public has never heard of, suddenly representing them as their monarch, even if the prime minister is the political leader of the country.

I don't think the reason the monarchy hasn't been abolished over this issue is that UK citizens would be perfectly happy to have the king of Norway or a Mr. Lascelles as their King. It is because the situation has not actually materialized, is currently unlikely to materialize, and the average citizen has no reason to think about it.



Of course it is all very unlikely to happen, but if the best that can be said in defense of a law is that in all probability it will not be put into effect, then it is probably high time to scrap the law. That is why, for example, the UK Parliament went and formally repealed hanging and quartering as a punishment, even though it had already fallen out of use.

 

[Mbruno]

Just started watching The Crown and it just occurred to me, although Prince Phillip renounced his foreign citizenship after marrying Elizabeth II, that technically, Kig Charles (as he is now) is line to the Danish throne. Probably quite a fair few places after Margethe II, but I thought this was interesting. Harald V of Norway is I think 63 places behind Prince William as far as the British throne is concerned, and I'm sure Margarethe II is in the British succession somewhere. Oh the tangled web that European royalty weaves!

King Charles III is not in the line of succession to the Danish throne. The Law of Succession of 1953 limited the Danish line of succession to the descendants of King Christian X and Queen Alexandrine only. King Charles III is a descendant of Christian IX, but not of Christian X.

King Harald V is definitely in the line of succession to the British throne although now a little bit lower than you said. Margrethe II and Carl XVI Gustaf should be in the line of succession too as Protestant descendants of Margaret of Connaught, but a fellow member of TRF once raised an objection here that Carl Gustaf's father's marriage to Princess Sibylla of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha might not have been valid under the (now repealed) Royal Marriages Act 1772, so it is unclear if Carl Gustaf is indeed in the line of succession to the British throne or not. King Willem-Alexander, who is also a descendant of George II, had been excluded from the British line of succession by marrying a Catholic, but he was reinstated by the Succession to the Crown Act 2013. King Felipe VI of Spain, who descends from Queen Victoria, remains excluded because he is a Catholic himself.

 

[Hans-Rickard]

Hadn’t the danish law of succession been changed to allow females (Margrethe) to succeed and not been restricted to the descendants of King Christian X and Queen Alexandrine - King Harald of Norway may have been Crown Prince of Denmark as well and heir to King Ingolf…

 

[LauraS3514]

The other monarchies of Europe have more reasonable lines of succession than the United Kingdom. The UK is the only European monarchy whose succession laws are so blatantly inappropriate for the 21st century as to grant foreign royalty the right to become King or Queen of the UK.

I've often wondered why they didn't restrict it in the Succession to the Crown Act. That would have been the perfect time to restrict it to the descendants of George V or even George VI**. I can't see them going back again to the Realms as it's so complicated and could now run the risk of the realms opting out by adding the whole monarchy question to the referendum.

**Restricting it to George VI's line would eliminate the senior Gloucesters and Kents who have given up their private lives in service to ERII. That may have been part of the consideration. The George V line would have kept the Lascelles/Harewoods in so why not the whole bunch...

 

[Tatiana Maria]

That would have been the perfect time [...]

I agree.

Hadn’t the danish law of succession been changed to allow females (Margrethe) to succeed and not been restricted to the descendants of King Christian X and Queen Alexandrine - King Harald of Norway may have been Crown Prince of Denmark as well and heir to King Ingolf…

Prince Carl of Denmark renounced his rights to the Danish throne on November 27, 1905, on which day he was inaugurated as King Haakon VII of Norway. That is why the Norwegian royals did not remain Princes and Princesses of Denmark, in contrast to the Greek royals.

 

[Friedrich Karl II]

I think that in most of European nations current monarch can't be on thrones of two nations. And Harald V and Margarethe II are so low on British line of succession that them have virtually zero changes to ascend British throne anyway.


Prince Philip was anyway born to Greek royalty and IIRC was quiet high on line of succession. Under very different circumstances him might had became king of Greece.


And I agree one previous that British succession system is ridicolous. It has idiotic long line of succession (something like 5000 names) and it allows non-Brit to ascend to the throne. That should had changed with some way when they reformed succession rules as absolute primogeniture succession. Even for restricting line of succession to descendants of Elizabeth II and limiting that only natural born British citizens who were educated in Britain you would have still pretty long line of succession.

 

[LauraS3514]

And I agree one previous that British succession system is ridicolous. It has idiotic long line of succession (something like 5000 names) and it allows non-Brit to ascend to the throne. That should had changed with some way when they reformed succession rules as absolute primogeniture succession. Even for restricting line of succession to descendants of Elizabeth II and limiting that only natural born British citizens who were educated in Britain you would have still pretty long line of succession.

The descendants of Queen Elizabeth II comprise the first 23 in line to the throne and if you go one generation further, the first 29 are from George VI. However, I mentioned somewhere that I didn't think they wanted to do that because it would have cut off The Queen's Gloucester and Kent cousins who worked all their lives for the monarchy, so they just left it alone.

 

[Friedrich Karl II]

The descendants of Queen Elizabeth II comprise the first 23 in line to the throne and if you go one generation further, the first 29 are from George VI. However, I mentioned somewhere that I didn't think they wanted to do that because it would have cut off The Queen's Gloucester and Kent cousins who worked all their lives for the monarchy, so they just left it alone.

Of course that oculd include only descendants of George V but that owuld be quiet long. But perhaps things could be compromised and only working royals and their children are included. Not sure if Kents or Gloucesters are eternally working for the family. It is just pointless that line of succession is that long.

 

[Denville]

what does it matter? Its not as if all the people on the line are being paid from the public funds, they are just on a list.

 

[Denville]

Of course that oculd include only descendants of George V but that owuld be quiet long. But perhaps things could be compromised and only working royals and their children are included. Not sure if Kents or Gloucesters are eternally working for the family. It is just pointless that line of succession is that long.

yes the Kents have worked for the monarchy all their lives and hte GLoucesters for much of their lives.

 

[Mbruno]

yes the Kents have worked for the monarchy all their lives and hte GLoucesters for much of their lives.

If the line of succession were restricted to the descendants of George V only, it would still include over 70 people today (also counting the Lascelles) and the numbers would again add up quickly over time. Restricting it to George VI's descendants only (currently 29 people) would keep the line shorter for a longer time.


The problem is that any change to the law of succession, even if simply to bar foreign citizens from inheriting the Crown as suggested in this thread, would have to go through the parliaments of the Commonwealth realms too as was the case with the Succession to the Crown Act 2013, and this process is very time consuming. If a citizenship requirement was deemed necessary, it should have been included in the 2013 reform. Introducing new legislation now to change just one single (and largely irrelevant) point in the law of succession is not practical.

 

[Stefan]

If the line of succession were restricted to the descendants of George V only, it would still include over 70 people today (also counting the Lascelles) and the numbers would again add up quickly over time. Restricting it to George VI's descendants only (currently 29 people) would keep the line shorter for a longer time.


The problem is that any change to the law of succession, even if simply to bar foreign citizens from inheriting the Crown as suggested in this thread, would have to go through the parliaments of the Commonwealth realms too as was the case with the Succession to the Crown Act 2013, and this process is very time consuming. If a citizenship requirement was deemed necessary, it should have been included in the 2013 reform. Introducing new legislation now to change just one single (and largely irrelevant) point in the law of succession is not practical.

The best would have to put it an automatic limit with the change of a Monarch like in the Netherlands or Norway. So that under Elizabeth II. it would have been to the descendants of Georg V. and now the descendants of George VI. And they should have done that with the new succession act in 2013.

 

[PhillyMonarchist]

The Duke of Edinburgh's renunciation aside, Denmark's 1953 Act of Succession limits the line of succession to the throne to descendants of King Christian X and Queen Alexandrine.

https://www.stm.dk/_p_12711.html

The other monarchies of Europe have more reasonable lines of succession than the United Kingdom. The UK is the only European monarchy whose succession laws are so blatantly inappropriate for the 21st century as to grant foreign royalty the right to become King or Queen of the UK.

Your acting like that is a possibility when it nots

 

[PhillyMonarchist]

How are U.K citizens going to be bothered about this? The real role regarding leadership is the prime minister not the monarch. Yes the monarch is “head of state” but it’s not the same. If there was a serious issue then maybe they might abolish the monarchy and create a republic, but it’s not a serious one now.

The dynasties in Sweden and Norway are younger and smaller and yes I’m referring to the dynasties. The vast of majority of people in the BRF succession are untitled, some of them are British aristocrats, others are descendants of deposed foreign royalty, others are gentry and some are commoners. Plus most of the reigning monarchs who have succession rights are over 50 and already have thrones and won’t live to claim to the British throne.

Willing to bet a majority are commoners

 

[Alison H]

I'm pretty sure that no-one lies awake at night worrying that a foreign royal is number 275 or whatever in the line of succession.

 

[Denville]

I'm pretty sure that no-one lies awake at night worrying that a foreign royal is number 275 or whatever in the line of succession.

If it happens, it happens. it wont be the end of the wrold.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Your acting like that is a possibility when it nots

Under the present succession law, it is.

I'm pretty sure that no-one lies awake at night worrying that a foreign royal is number 275 or whatever in the line of succession.

I am also pretty sure that no one would lie awake at night worrying if number 275 had been removed from the line of succession when it was reformed in 2013.

 

[PhillyMonarchist]

Under the present succession law, it is.



I am also pretty sure that no one would lie awake at night worrying if number 275 had been removed from the line of succession when it was reformed in 2013.

It be a waste of time for the number of countries to make the law requiring that it’s a non issue

 

[noc]

I'm pretty sure that no-one lies awake at night worrying that a foreign royal is number 275 or whatever in the line of succession.

I chuckled at this however, it does beg the question of how many claims Charles or any other royal could invoke based on bloodline

Although I am sure his duties are so vast that there would be no desire to focus attention elsewhere

 

[Tatiana Maria]

It be a waste of time for the number of countries to make the law requiring that it’s a non issue

It would have taken no significant extra time if included in the Succession to the Crown Act.