# Royal succession laws changed in UK **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [October 28, 2011, 10:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/royal-succession-laws-changed-in-uk/601060 "2011-10-28T10:01:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Dendarii\_Dame](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/bbce88/32.png) [@Dendarii\_Dame](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dendarii_Dame)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/royal-succession-laws-changed-in-uk/601060/81 "2011-11-02T13:36:34Z")
I read somewhere that after the current queen’s father died, they had to wait for a while before crowning her Elizabeth II to make sure her mother wasn’t pregnant with (possibly) a male heir. ---
**Author:** ![Cicero](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cicero/32/3594_2.png) [@Cicero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cicero)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/royal-succession-laws-changed-in-uk/601060/82 "2011-11-02T13:48:09Z")
> [@Dendarii\_Dame](#): > > I read somewhere that after the current queen’s father died, they had to wait for a while before crowning her Elizabeth II to make sure her mother wasn’t pregnant with (possibly) a male heir. Her mother would have been 52/ 53 so it seems unlikely that was a consideration. I would add that Princess Margaret had been born 23 years before her fathers death so it would be a big coincidence after all that time that the Queen Mother fell pregnant. ---
**Author:** ![APB](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8e8cbc/32.png) [@APB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/APB)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/royal-succession-laws-changed-in-uk/601060/83 "2011-11-02T16:51:25Z")
> [@Dendarii\_Dame](#): > > I read somewhere that after the current queen’s father died, they had to wait for a while before crowning her Elizabeth II to make sure her mother wasn’t pregnant with (possibly) a male heir. The facts suggest otherwise. Or, if there was a doubt, it was one that was clarified without delay. The Accession Council met at 5pm on 6 February 1952, a mere ten hours after George VI’s body had been discovered, and it immediately approved the proclamation of Princess Elizabeth as the new Queen. It is difficult to see how this could have been done any faster and, indeed, the announcement of the King’s death and the steps to summon the Council had been implemented so quickly that at that point officials had still been uncertain whether the new Queen had been contacted (she hadn’t). Now it is true that the Council had to meet again two days later and only then publically proclaimed her. But that was because the Queen had first to fly back from Kenya. That the proclamation had been approved and that it would be proclaimed on 8 February had, in any case, been officially announced following the meeting on 6 February. Peers and MPs had, on that basis, begun taking the oaths of allegiance to her on the evening of 6 February. It is, of course, also true that she was not crowned until June 1953. But in modern times, coronations (apart from the special case of George VI’s) have always been held at least a year after the accession. That’s purely a matter of logistics. ---
**Author:** ![alphaboi867](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alphaboi867/32/3898_2.png) [@alphaboi867](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alphaboi867)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/royal-succession-laws-changed-in-uk/601060/84 "2011-11-02T17:24:52Z")
Did Prince William’s dukedom have the standard remainder to “heirs _male_ of a his body”? Will that be changed if this legislation passes in all realms, or will it be left as is? That could create an odd situtation where if he dies after having a daughter and son (in that order), but before becoming King his peerage will go to his son, but the throne to his daughter. ---
**Author:** ![Arnold\_Winkelried](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Arnold\_Winkelried](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arnold_Winkelried)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/royal-succession-laws-changed-in-uk/601060/85 "2011-11-02T18:19:43Z")
> [@Siam\_Sam](#): > > Could a pair of Siamese Twins rule, of either gender? No, one of them would be forced to [wear a mask](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2047/who-was-the-man-in-the-iron-mask) and could not be King or Queen. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Feldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lord_feldon/32/341_2.png) [@Lord\_Feldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Feldon)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/royal-succession-laws-changed-in-uk/601060/86 "2011-11-02T19:48:47Z")
> [@alphaboi867](#): > > Did Prince William’s dukedom have the standard remainder to “heirs _male_ of a his body”? [Yes:](http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/59798/pages/10297) “In accordance with the direction of HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Letters Patent have passed the Great Seal of the Realm dated the 26 May 2011 granting unto Her Majesty’s Grandson, His Royal Highness Prince William Arthur Philip Louis of Wales, K.G., and the heirs male of his body lawfully begotten the dignities of Baron Carrickfergus, Earl of Strathearn, and Duke of Cambridge.” > [@alphaboi867](#): > > Will that be changed if this legislation passes in all realms, or will it be left as is? [They’re not touching peerages.](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/8840016/Ministers-bar-hereditary-peerages-from-passing-to-women.html) ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/royal-succession-laws-changed-in-uk/601060/87 "2011-11-02T20:58:21Z")
> [@alphaboi867](#): > > That could create an odd situtation where if he dies after having a daughter and son (in that order), but before becoming King his peerage will go to his son, but the throne to his daughter. I don’t think this is an “odd” situation. In fact, I suspect that it’s entirely intentional. If William’s firstborn is a girl, then he later has a boy, then the dukedom will be like a consolation prize for the kid, who, had he been born a few years earlier, would have been first in line. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Feldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lord_feldon/32/341_2.png) [@Lord\_Feldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Feldon)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/royal-succession-laws-changed-in-uk/601060/88 "2011-11-02T21:13:52Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > If William’s firstborn is a girl, then he later has a boy, then the dukedom will be like a consolation prize for the kid, who, had he been born a few years earlier, would have been first in line. But if William is ever king, his dukedom will cease to exist, so that can only happen if he dies without ever being the king. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2011, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/royal-succession-laws-changed-in-uk/601060/89 "2011-11-02T21:54:27Z")
> [@Lord\_Feldon](#): > > But if William is ever king, his dukedom will cease to exist, so that can only happen if he dies without ever being the king. It’s not an unheard of occurrence. Given how long-lived the Windsor family tends to be, I’m guessing that the probabilities are increasing that there’s going to be a “skip” pretty soon in which an heir apparent predeceases the sitting monarch. ---
**Author:** ![Cunctator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/43a26b/32.png) [@Cunctator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cunctator)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2011, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/royal-succession-laws-changed-in-uk/601060/90 "2011-11-03T01:12:32Z")
> [@alphaboi867](#): > > Victoria also had 2 older brothers, both of whom were alive at the time of her ascension. Correction: Victoria had [one older half-brother](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl,_3rd_Prince_of_Leiningen) and [one older half-sister](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Feodora_of_Leiningen). ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2011, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/royal-succession-laws-changed-in-uk/601060/91 "2011-11-03T01:48:09Z")
I take it both were illegitimate? ---
**Author:** ![Cunctator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/43a26b/32.png) [@Cunctator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cunctator)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2011, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/royal-succession-laws-changed-in-uk/601060/92 "2011-11-03T02:04:30Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > I take it both were illegitimate? No. They were the children of Victoria’s mother’s first marriage. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/royal-succession-laws-changed-in-uk/601060.md?page=4)