Question:
Why was Princess Anne 3rd in the line of succession at the time of her birth but as of 2013, she is 10th?
ALR
2013-08-25 05:51:24 UTC
According to a July article from US Weekly, Princess Anne was 3rd in the line of succession at the time of her birth. As the second child of Queen Elizabeth, why wasn’t she 2nd in line? If she was 3rd and Prince Charles was 1st, who was 2nd?
(I know that recently the law was amended so that gender no longer impacts the line of succession. I read one suggestion that this was passed to modernize the British Royalty. Others speculated the real reason was Queen Elizabeth’s affection for Prince William and her desire that his first child's place wasn't affected by gender.) Since that is a new law, even though Prince Andrew was born 9 years after Princess Anne, he moved ahead of her. Why is Princess Anne now 10th behind the children of Prince Andrew, Princess Beatrice (5th) and Princess Eugenie (6th) and the children of Prince Edward, Louise (8th) and James (9th)? Wouldn’t she be ahead of Prince Andrew’s and Prince Edward’s children since she was born years earlier?
Nine answers:
?
2013-08-25 14:18:56 UTC
Because the law of male-preference primogeniture puts her behind all her brothers and their descendants, so every time they or their children have a baby, she gets pushed another place down the line. She's actually 11th in line now since the birth of Prince George.



At the time of Princess Anne's birth, King George VI was still on the throne (she was born in 1950, he died in 1952) so the start of the line of succession looked like this:

1. Princess Elizabeth (now Queen Elizabeth II)

2. Prince Charles

3. Princess Anne.



The important point for what you are saying is that the new law does not apply retrospectively. So it doesn't affect Princess Anne's place behind all her brothers and their children and grandchildren. It hasn't actually come into force yet - we're still waiting for all 16 countries that Queen Elizabeth II is queen of to enact it - but it specifically states that it only applies to anyone in the line of succession born after the date of the Perth Agreement in 2011, when the Commonwealth countries got together and agreed it, so it doesn't affect Princess Anne's or her children's place in line. The first person it affects is Senna Lewis, granddaughter of the Duke of Gloucester - when the law comes into force she will "leapfrog" her younger brother born in 2012. Not that this makes much difference as they are 27th and 28th in line and the chances of either of them becoming king or queen are minuscule!



That's the thing - the law only affects the future, which is something the British Parliament is always mindful of when passing law. There's a convention that you don't pass backdated laws, because otherwise how can you ever surely know what the law is? If I do something today and in five years time it gets made illegal, why should I end up in court for something that was perfectly legal when I did it?



The Succession to the Crown Act 2013 is very much political and almost nothing to do with what the Queen thinks. We believe in gender equality, Parliament wanted it, the other European monarchies have already done it, it's about time the British monarchy did it too.
?
2013-08-25 07:39:39 UTC
When Princess Anne was born, her mother was not Queen, but heir apparent. Thus Elizabeth was first in line to the throne, Charles as her first born was second, and Anne at the time of her birth was third.



As a female, Anne was always going to be at the bottom of the list. That is what the male preference means. Any males come before any females. So of Queen Elizabeth's children, Charles is first as the first born son, then Andrew as the next eldest, the Edward then Anne, despite when they were born. The age criteria only comes into play when they're the same sex. Hence why Charles is ahead of Andrew.



In terms of the line of succession, children follow their fathers. So any child of Charles comes after Charles. Same for Andrew, and Edward, and if any of those children (lets say William) has children they come directly after their dad also. (Prince George has pushed Harry, and everyone else down one slot as he follows his dad).



The eldest son is, in essence the most important, and he passes everything on to his eldest son, and so on.



The new law wasn't down to the Queen. She does not change laws, she might have suggested it, but in all likelihood, it was the government and the Queen. I don't see the point about William being a favourite as being a reason for this, any child Will has will follow him.



The issue has never really need to be addressed before, as both the Queen and Diana had boy's first. I don't know if when Will was born, in 80s UK, if it would have ever been considered then, but Will was male so there was never any issue. With William and Catherine getting married, and the approaching of a new heir, I believe the gov. wanted to get everything sorted out, just in case. It was announced in 2011, long before Baby George was a twinkle in his daddies eye, and basically because it was an old, outdated law. However it also affects a LOT of other things, not just all the Commonwealth countries but other titles etc. of the nobility, that it hasn't been finalised.



The new law will not however be retro-sepective. It will only begin the day Parliament spoke about it which I believe was 20 something of October 2011. It will affect all babies/births from then.



* James, Viscount Seven is ahead of Lady Louise.



It goes Charles, William, George, Harry, Andrew, Beatrice, Eugenie, Edward, James, Louise, Anne, Peter, Savannah, Isla, Zara, then back up to the Queen's siblings, she only had one, and she's died, so then its her children, and so forth.
Clo
2013-08-25 08:39:56 UTC
The reason is male-preference primogeniture, a rule that was onlly changed this year. The eldest male inherits first. So, with each subsequent birth of a male sibling, Anne was pushed down the line of succession:

Charles, Andrew, Edward, Anne



Then, when each brother married and had children, each birth pressed Anne further down the line:

Charles, William, Harry, Andrew, Beatrice, Eugenie, Edward, Lord Severn, Lady Louise, Anne, Peter Phillips, Zara Phillips...
GC
2013-08-25 06:07:12 UTC
When Princess Anne was born, her grand father was king (George VI) not her mother. heir presumptive was then Princess Elizabeth, 2nd was Prince Charles and 3rd was Princess Anne.

The new law about gender equality affects only to the people born after 11th september 2011, Therefore Prince Andrew is after Descendents of Charles.
chardip
2016-11-03 10:48:27 UTC
Where Was Princess Anne Born
Haley M
2013-08-25 10:29:12 UTC
When Anne was born, her grandfather was still king so her mother was first in line and her brother was second. When her mother became Queen, Anne was bumped up so second in line but was gradually bumped down following the births of her two younger brothers and their children.
sarah britian
2013-08-25 06:23:50 UTC
Males hier are thought first to rule ,female are thought to continue the bloodline to make hiers.Also female royalty is thought of as the productive future title mates for the royal male hiers of other houses.So they marry well they prove to be more valuable then even the men.By their choices and running of their hiers...Male hiers are first consideration because ,it's to protect the female hiers and the children .Who would remain to take cares of the male and female hiers.So natural they would think to hurt the male hier in war or battle than the female ,who produce the future...Charles,first born,(first inline)Andrew third born 2nd inline(at those time) and Anne because Edward hadn't been born yet.But Anne would be the last after all her brothers have been born.To protect the legacy of her mother reign .Anne is smarter and careful hearted,I like her and met her .She really is nice...
Lost Equation
2013-08-25 06:12:32 UTC
here is the line of succession: The first 15 individuals in the line of succession are all descended from Queen Elizabeth II:[



1 Prince Charles, Prince of Wales, has been first in the line of succession since 1952.1.Charles, Prince of Wales (b 1948), eldest son of Queen Elizabeth II

2.Prince William, Duke of Cambridge (b 1982), elder son of Charles, Prince of Wales

3.Prince George of Cambridge (b 2013), son of Prince William, Duke of Cambridge

4.Prince Harry of Wales (b 1984), younger son of Charles, Prince of Wales

5.Prince Andrew, Duke of York (b 1960), second son of Queen Elizabeth II

6.Princess Beatrice of York (b 1988), elder daughter of Prince Andrew, Duke of York

7.Princess Eugenie of York (b 1990), younger daughter of Prince Andrew, Duke of York

8.Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex (b 1964), youngest son of Queen Elizabeth II

9.James, Viscount Severn (b 2007), son of Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex

10.Lady Louise Windsor (b 2003), daughter of Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex

11.Anne, Princess Royal (b 1950), daughter of Queen Elizabeth II

12.Peter Phillips (b 1977), son of Anne, Princess Royal

13.Savannah Phillips (b 2010), daughter of Peter Phillips

14.Isla Phillips (b 2012), daughter of Peter Phillips

15.Zara Phillips (b 1981), daughter of Anne, Princess Royal
2016-05-28 08:46:06 UTC
Simple. New people get born over the years.


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...