Help me understand "9th in line to throne"

[LittleHootie]

Following Beatrice getting married, the news refers to her as 9th in line. So does that mean these people would have to die before she was queen...

Queen 0
Charles 1
Wills 2
George 3
Anne 4
Peter 5
Peter kid 6
Andrew 7
Eugenie 8
Queen BEE 9

I have no faith at all in my guesses. Harry must be above her. Hmmm

OK . . . so why is Edwards son (Viscount Severn) higher up than his daughter (Louise) who is older than him?

Because sons are ahead of daughters. That changed when Charlotte was born but was not made retrospective

I was just going to post about that Tea

@user1493423934

OK . . . so why is Edwards son (Viscount Severn) higher up than his daughter (Louise) who is older than him?

Because they were born before the rule on females changed.

All the people wondering about the son/ daughter thing - look up primogeniture. And that it still applies, even if you are trans.

I think it was changed before George was born - so that their first born would retain their position in the line regardless of their sex

Does Harry still count?

yes Harry still counts.

Although I understand Parliament has a veto as well...

Haha @TeaStory I thought of King Ralph when I commented about Andrew taking the throne having good film potential.

Is harry still allowed to be king? Because he has given up his royal status?

I think post 2 has it. The Queen isn’t number 1 as she’s already IT. Princess Anne comes after all her brothers cos she’s a girly and her DC come after her so after Andrew’s and Edward’s offspring. However, the rule on primogeniture was changed so Charlotte gets her place after her big bro and before her little bro. But it’s not changed retrospectively for Anne.

I puzzled about Harry. When he gave up royal duties they said he’d keep his place, so Archie does too, but I thought he wasn’t to use the duke of wherever title.

Parliament would have to legislate to change the order of succession, as would the Parliaments of all the other Commonwealth countries where the Queen is Head of State. Unless or until they do, Harry and Archie remain in the line of succession.

18. Mrs. Michael Tindall

I assume this is Zara, Princess Anne's daughter? Above is copied and pasted from the royal website. I wonder if Bee will have her name changed to her husband's name? Even if she doesn't actually change her name.

I’ve always wondered why a Women becomes Queen when the king inherits the throne but A man doesn’t become a king when a women inherits the throne.
Is it because men have to kings by blood and not marriage.

I’ve always wondered why a Woman becomes Queen when the king inherits the throne but A man doesn’t become a king

Because when Mary Tudor married Philip of Spain in 1554, he did become King, and the marriage was disastrous for England (as everyone had predicted) so the consensus was never again would a male consort become king, with all the power that implies.

William III was consort to a reigning queen, but he was also king in his own right, as the nearest male protestant heir.

There was another change at the time that Prince George was born too — normally only Charles's first grandson would be Prince, but it was changed so all the children would be titled. Otherwise, with the primogeniture change, you could have ended up with 'only' a Lady Cambridge 3rd in line to the throne, but her younger brother would be a prince.

I don’t think bee will have her name (unless she requests it to be) changed as she is a royal princess which takes president. Zara chose to become mrs tindall and as the royal family are big into tradition her name is mrs Michael tindall. If anybody called me mrs dh first name surname I’d throttle them even though I’ve chosen to take his surname

The line has been posted before by previous posters.

When Beatrice was born, she was number 5, but they all slip down a number whenever someone above them has a baby!
Feel most sorry for Anne, to be honest. She comes after most of her nieces/nephews and even grand-nephews/nieces, desite being the Queens daughter. If they had got rid of the male heir precedence before she was born, she'd be much higher up the scale.

Also notable that the inheritance law change applied to the succession, but not to titles generally. So regardless of whether she was born pre or post the law change, Lady Louise would never have been Viscount Severn.

Yes, will he interesting when a family succession feud involves an older daughter who decides to transition to male and take by legal force her younger brother's "birthright". Will be very, very interesting. It'll happen.

Thanks Letitia

It all seems to be quite a complicated mish-mash of tradition and parliamentary law.

I'm not sure if the Queen could actually strip Harry of his HRH title or whether that requires an Act of Parliament. AIUI Harry has simply agreed not to use his HRH title. Also I'm not sure if it's possible to strip him of his dukedom - has that ever happened? I suppose Harry could do a kind of abdication, though.

One interesting factoid I discovered some while ago was that the Act of Succession stipulated that anyone within the first six in line who marries under the age of 25 without the Sovereign's permission is removed permanently from the line of succession but retains their title (and their marriage is still valid).

I'm not sure if I have understood, PicsInRed, but the Gender Recognition Act specifically excluded the possibility of a first-born daughter transitioning to male and taking the title from a younger brother. I suppose that was the only way to get that Act through that well-known Boy's Club, aka the House of Lords.

@Boringnamechanging

Takes precedence not takes president.

Are heirs still banned from marrying Catholics? I seem to remember reading that it changed, but not sure!

@DancingInDespair

They can marry Catholics since their husband/wife would never become head of state but any children from the marriage need to be raised in the church of England, as they might become head if state and head of the church.

They can marry Catholics since their husband/wife would never become head of state but any children from the marriage need to be raised in the church of England, as they might become head if state and head of the church

Interesting- especially as I thought (I may be wrong!) that part of the conditions for a Catholic marrying someone of another faith was that any children be brought up in the Catholic faith.