a king has had an affair and conceived a boy (with a servant), but with his queen he had 3 girls all of whom are younger than the boy. Who would inherit the throne?
2007-04-19 05:52:40 · 24 answers · asked by Beautiful Diva 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Royalty
In most countries illegitimate children cannot inherit titles. Charles II had many illegitimate children but when he died he was succeeded by his brother, though the descendants of Charles's bastards survive among the aristocracy today ('the ennobled indiscretions of a king'). DarkQ and teej cannot cite one example of a king succeeded by an illegitimate son.
2007-04-19 07:11:52 · answer #1 · answered by Julia S 1 · 7⤊ 0⤋
His oldest daughter. He could have an affair with the Queen of spain and have 20 sons with her all older then his daughter's if the child is the product of an affair he has no legal rights to the throne of his fathers country but could probably gain the throne of his mothers country, circumstances pending
2007-04-22 07:41:13 · answer #2 · answered by Gypsy 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The eldest legitimate child. The only time(I recall) when an illegitimate child inherited the throne was in the case of Prince Ranier's mother, Charlotte. The Monegasque constitution was revised to allow her to inherit the throne back in 1922.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Charlotte%2C_Duchess_of_Valentinois
2007-04-21 19:25:34 · answer #3 · answered by Pink_Pirate 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In most European monarchies, the throne can only be inherited by legitimate offspring - that is, children conceived between the King and his wife. A current example involves Prince Albert II of Monaco, who has publicly acknowledged two illegitimate children. Because Albert was not married to either of their mothers, neither child is in Monaco's line of succession.
2007-04-19 06:33:36 · answer #4 · answered by JerH1 7 · 6⤊ 0⤋
The oldest girl. The boy would have a claim only if he raised an army and started a war which has been known to happen once every couple of hundred years or so.
2007-04-20 07:41:37 · answer #5 · answered by rann_georgia 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's all about birthright. You don't have birthright if you don't have the legitimacy of marriage. Children born out of wedlock, are, still illegitimate. Society has become so acceptable of it that we don't seem to notice anymore, but it's still wrong. The eldest girl with the birthright would inherit the throne.
2007-04-23 05:51:04 · answer #6 · answered by .. .this can't be good 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The boy would not get it the first born girl would.Do you think they would let it be known the King had A son to a servant.
2007-04-23 03:51:46 · answer #7 · answered by Ollie 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Let's take it the way it stands now....Elizabeth inherited from her father, Charles is next, then Wills, then Harry, then the next boy - Andrew, then the next boy. But if there are no legitimate males in the hierarchy then it goes to the oldest female in the line.
2007-04-19 23:01:29 · answer #8 · answered by mom of girls 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Unless it was a free thinking, liberal and decent royal house it would must likely be one of the girls , that happened in Monaco the present King has a son out of marriage but it is written in the constitution that the heir's parents must have been married when he was born. Most royal houses are very snobby and emotionally cold, look at the british royals the queen left her new born and went off to Austrailia for months, then the public got upset about it she returned. Love and open hearts are not really their thing. UK, America and most European countries as well as countless others signed a charter declaring that No child can be illegitimate, this would be a good test to see would they hold to that charter. I do not think the heir should be gender specific either, also the first born may not be really up to it, sod it this is royalty we are discussing. It is not a good system, elitist and snobby class system who needs it. Viva democracy.
2007-04-19 06:33:21 · answer #9 · answered by loislane 2 · 2⤊ 4⤋
no person may well be declared King or Queen until eventually the delivery occurred. as quickly as the delivery occurred, the youngster may well be declared King or Queen. somebody may well be declared Regent, in all risk the King's pregnant spouse, or queen, until eventually the youngster - if born- is eighteen years previous. it is an exceedingly exciting question. on the time of George VI's dying, Queen Elizabeth the Queen mom had to be shown as no longer being pregnant, even nevertheless she grew to become into fifty one years previous on the time in the previous her daughter, the present Queen Elizabeth, might desire to be proclaimed Queen. If the Queen mom have been pregnant, nonetheless attainable yet uncommon on the age of fifty one, the intercourse of the youngster may well be significant - if it have been a boy, the youngster may well be King while born. they won't proclaim the present Queen Elizabeth as temporary queen; and ask her to step aside if it have been a boy.
2016-12-29 10:13:06 · answer #10 · answered by regula 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋