If Queen Elizabeth II dies then Prince Charles will succeed to the Throne. But if he Dies why does it go to Prince William and not Andrew if he is The Queens second son? Shouldn't all The Queens childrenn come first in order of age(oldest to youngest) and then start with the grandchildren starting with the oldest of the oldest child? does that not make since to anyone else?
2007-01-18 07:41:34 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Royalty
because once charles becomes king it goes to HIS oldest son, just like the throne went to him because he is elizabeth's oldest son.
if charles didnt have any children then it would go to andrew.
2007-01-18 09:18:11 · answer #1 · answered by moonshine 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In regards to the British royal family, no, it always passes from the oldest son to oldest son (or daughter, if the current monarch has no male children). The exception would be if a monarch dies or abdicates the throne and has -no- living heirs, then it would go to the extended family (ie, his or her younger brothers or sisters). One good example of this is when Elizabeth II's uncle abdicated (or gave up the throne) in order to marry a non-royal divorcee. Since he had no children the throne went to his younger brother, Elizabeth's father. Once the throne has switched over to a new line like that, it never goes back under normal circumstances.
This system seems more practical than the one you suggest - although you run the risk of having a child become a king or queen, you avoid the risk of having one old sibling die and another take over -- if several siblings were close in age and died around the same time, you would go through monarchs pretty rapidly. Also, once all the brothers and sisters had died, who would take over at that point? The oldest child of the oldest one, or the child of the most recent to die? The potential for squabbling is increased significantly.
2007-01-18 15:49:33 · answer #2 · answered by Ryan 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The title passes from oldest son to oldest son. If there are no sons, then to the oldest daughter such as the current queen. The beginning of the order of succession is:
1. Prince Charles
2. Prince William
3. Prince Harry
4. Prince Andrew
5. Princess Beatrice
6. Princess Eugenia
If William has children, they will come in order below him and before Harry.
2007-01-18 19:25:57 · answer #3 · answered by Irish1952 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The key to this is DIRECT succession. First prince Charles then his children, then their children etc. If there are none of those, then Prince Andrew, his children etc. Then Prince Edward.
2007-01-18 15:51:14 · answer #4 · answered by yvonne 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Something to do with the best "genes" being handed down to the first offspring. Other children get second rate genes, even for royalty. So the primary child and his offspring have the "best genes".
This is, of course, only the system of belief which led to the system of succession, and is not factually true according to science.
2007-01-18 15:49:45 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Your suggestion makes no sense.
Charles is the Queen's heir, and William is Charles' heir. It's a straightforward chain of inheritance.
2007-01-18 19:13:27 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
It makes no sense to me either. Some countries do it the way you said, the saudi for instance.
2007-01-18 15:50:17 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋