Talk:Order of succession

Law Mid‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

alt.talk.royalty FAQ

The alt.talk.royalty FAQ is wrong when it states that primogeniture is a type of succession whereby males take precedence over females - and, when I search through their archives, it seems most people on ATR would agree with me. It is just a general term for a succession which favours the elder child above the younger, nothing more. Both Japan, Britain and Belgium have a form of primogeniture. They seem to call the British-type succession (males above females) male-preference primogeniture. And Spain has used this system since Ferdinand VII (not counting interregnums), and also before 1713. Erwin 12:49 23 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I've always heard it refered to a patrolineal primogeniture. Where the eldest male is heir.

Maybe that helps — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.74.138.53 (talk) 15:46, 10 November 2004‎

Divides equally?

What is the name of the type of succession where the monarch/noble divides up his estate equally to all his sons(or children)? This was done by the Franks and other Germanic tribes. Maybe this is considered a form of inheritance rather than succession?--Countakeshi 12:12, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

partible inheritance or salic patrimony perhaps. Maed 19:59, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup requested

I listed this page on Wikipedia:Cleanup because it repeats itself, dupes info from other pages, and generally just needs reorganisation. /blahedo (t) 07:59, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm getting a bunch of errors with the top of this. Is it just me, or is the page faulty? The Jade Knight 22:09, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quasi-salic law

No mention of Quasi-salic inheritance, where succession is allowed through the female line, just thefemales themselves do not inherit, but the sons of females can. - Matthew238 22:45, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Saudi Arabia

is there an article about Saudi Arabia's succession ? --mo-- (^Talk | _#info | ) 22:05, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet, apparently. {{sofixit}}? ;) —Nightst a llion (?) 09:19, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Go first to read agnatic seniority. It describes in general terms what happens in saudi Arabia. And if you have more information to write, go start something like Order of succession of the kingdom of Saudi Arabia Shilkanni 01:37, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To conform with the others, it should be line of succession to the Saudi Arabian throne. Incidentally, I don't know anything about the lines of succession in Thailand and Lesotho... help? —Nightst a llion (?) 21:12, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Given that there is no line of succession, but merely a designated crown prince and a process by which a crown prince is to be designated, shouldn't this article be at something like Succession to the throne of Saudi Arabia? (I will admit to strongly disliking the adjectival format that seems to dominate these articles). john k 01:33, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Name change

In June, User:Maed moved this from Order of succession to succession order. This seems just plain wrong. None of the article text, or the other articles in the series, has been changed in line. I suggest moving it back. jnestorius^(talk) 22:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed it. The first move was undiscussed. Charles 02:27, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Missing articles

The title should not necessarily be "line of succession" for the ones that don't have a line of succession. Royal succession in Cambodia might be a better title, for instance. Personally, I think it would be better to insure that we have articles on succession laws, and to discuss them in a historical context, than to worry too much about the actual order of succession. john k 03:49, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, I just want to have content on Wikipedia about the succession laws of all monarchies. —Nightst a llion (?) 17:23, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I'd add that I'd like to see articles on succession laws in former monarchies, and on older succession laws in current monarchies. Denmark, for instance, has had a series of them - elective until the reign of Frederik III (1648-1670), then Semi-Salic until his male line died out in 1863, then Salic for 90 years, and now male-preference primogeniture. The current article more or less only deals with the current succession rules. I'd also like to see wikipedia articles about house laws more generally. Getting articles on succession laws in all current monarchies is a good start, certainly. john k 02:51, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aye. —Nightst a llion (?) 23:16, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal deleted

Although proposed for merger, no case has been provided for merger. It is clear upon reading these articles that there are significant differences – each article addresses a topic which warrants discussion independently. If you feel strongly, please follow proposed mergers and provide a logical proposal for merger. Until then, the merger proposal is deleted. Skål Williamborg (Bill) 23:54, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge from Hereditary succession models

Hereditary succession models is mostly redundant with this article but has some nice discussion of the hereditary rules. I propose to merge the other article here and redirect. --Selket ^Talk 19:49, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. I created that article (ok, the former Succession laws that was moved to Hereditary succession models) and also the images there. I think it would be the best, per Occam's Razor. --Neigel von Teighen 08:53, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article seems so resolutely generic and non-historical it seems to have no place for information from Margalit Finkelberg, "Royal Succession in Heroic Greece" The Classical Quarterly, New Series, 41.2 (1991:303-316), which discusses the succession patterns of legendary and historical kings in pre-Classical Greece, where succession from father to son is not the norm, but where instead the new king, traditionally exiled from a royal line elsewhere, wins the right as son-in-law of the old king, legitimised through his marriage to the daughter. This pattern is immediately familiar to a reader of Greek mythology, in Pelops, Bellerophon, Melampous, Peleus, Telamon, Teukros, Andraimon, Diomedes, Menelaus, and others. In Greece, until quite a late Hellenistic date, there is an absence of the king list that's so familiar everywhere in the Near East and Anatolia. If the king is succeeded by his son-in-law, Finkelberg notes (p. 305), that means the queen is succeeded by her daughter, in a culture that was on its surface relentlessly patriarchal: "That is to say, in Sparta, and obviously in other places for which kingship by marriage is attested, rather than a line of kings, we have a line of queens that runs from mother to daughter." This is an "order" of succession that doesn't seem to be discussed here. --Wetman (talk) 15:59, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Korea.....

should not be plugged into agnatic so thoughtlessly. There has been a long custom of the family, especially the dowager queens, of choosing the best person for the job - usually, but not always, that person was male. If that person wasn't in the direct line, then, by golly, they could be adopted into the direct line. --Dan (talk) 20:59, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Templates

Two boxes were removed on October 12 with the note, "I'm sorry, if I can't center inline these templates, they don't belong here." I don't understand; explain please? —Tamfang (talk) 05:51, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lateral succession

Moving the following bloc of text from the article here because 1. it needs reliable citations (as much of it is not "common knowledge") and 2. it is not about inheritance of a dynasty's main throneby a single heir, but about the secondary rights and possessions of other dynasts. It probably belongs in Appanage or Cadet branch or both.

The rule of lateral succession applies not only to the supreme throne, but consequentially to all other leading appontments in the state. As a younger brother ascends to the supreme throne to replace his late older brother, in turn his younger brother, or an eldest nephew who is next in line ascends to his vacated position of an heir-in-waiting, freeing a higher post for the next in line, and so on. That orderly line-up of potential successors created a peculiar social organization of the state, with no ancestral or hereditary possessions within the dynastic line, but a kind of extended sequence of temporal "Princes of Wales", each successor in line assigned an area of responsibility correlated with his proximity to the supreme throne, and on a smaller scale given the same rights as those belonging to the supreme throne. The lateral succession administrative structure is necessarily complemented by a secondatry tier of a permanent local administrative structure, on a clan, tribal, and tribal confederation level, with autonomous local tradition of inheritance, appointment, or election independent of the state dynastic line, and governed by the particular local traditions. In practice, with acquisition or annexation of the new territories and people, the existing local power structure usually remained intact and undisturbed, and a new layer of external supervision was added to bring the new subjects under control by one of the dynastic offices within the dynastic line of lateral succession.

Horledi (talk) 13:07, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Definition of primogeniture

... male descendants of the sovereign take precedence over female descendants ...

So Peter Phillips comes before Eugenie of York? I'm rewriting it ... —Tamfang (talk) 17:08, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Current Succession systems to the world's monarchies

This section was uploaded in its entirety to the Primogeniture article by an anon. Moved here pending addition of reliable sourcing for the list as a whole or for each of its components. As it stands now, it can't be used because it's either original research or, more likely, plagiarism from some website. Moreover, some entries appear to be erroneous, e.g. Saudi Arabia's order of succession is closer to agnatic seniority than to primogeniture, and Swaziland's is closer to ultimogeniture than to primogeniture. Nice project for someone to correct, corroborate and cite -- and then try to keep updated...

Andorra: elective
Antigua and Barbuda:Male-preference Primogeniture
Australia: Male-preference Primogeniture
The Bahamas: Male-preference Primogeniture
Bahrain:a mixture of agnatic primogeniture and election/nomination
Barbados: Male-preference Primogeniture
Belgium: Absolute Primogeniture
Belize: Male-preference Primogeniture
Bhutan:Male-preference Primogeniture
Brunei:Agnatic Primogeniture
Cambodia: a mixture of agnatic primogentiure and elction/nomination
Canada: Male-preference Primogeniture
Denmark: Absolute Primogeniture
Grenada: Male-preference Primogeniture
Jamaica:Male-preference Primogeniture
Kuwait:a mixture of agnatic primogentiure and elction/nomination
Lesotho:a mixture of agnatic primogentiure and elction/nomination
Liechtenstein: Agnatic Primogeniture
Luxembourg: Absolute Primogeniture
Malaysia: Elective
Monaco:Male-preference Primogeniture
Morocco: Agnatic Primogenture
New Zealand: Absolute Primogeniture
Netherlands: Absolute Primogeniture
Norway: Absolute Primogeniture
Oman:a mixture of agnatic primogeniture and election/nomination
Papua New Guinea: Male-preference Primogeniture
Qatar:a mixture of agnatic primogeniture and election/nomination
Saint Kitts and Nevis:Male-preference Primogeniture
Saint Lucia:Male-preference Primogeniture
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines:Male-preference Primogeniture
Saudi Arabia: a mixture of agnatic primogeniture and election/nomination
Solomon Islands:Male-preference Primogeniture
Spain:Male-preference Primogeniture
Swaziland:a mixture of agnatic primogeniture and election/nomination
Sweden: Absolute Primogeniture
Thailand:a mixture of male-preference primogeniture and election/nomination
Tonga:Male-preference Primogeniture
Tuvalu:Male-preference Primogeniture
United Kingdom: Male-preference Primogeniture
Vatican City: Elective (FactStraight (talk) 05:46, 15 November 2011 (UTC))[reply]

-Apologies; this was me; done in somewhat of a rush; but its mostly accurate; but yes, it needs properly sourcing. :)JWULTRABLIZZARD (talk) 22:57, 15 November 2011 (UTC) -Also; it wasn't plagiarised from a website, it was done by going through each wikipedia article on the orders of succession for each monarchy. I would like to put it in table form once it has been properly referenced. JWULTRABLIZZARD (talk) 02:14, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]