Hector Fenwick
Commoner
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2020
- Messages
- 23
- City
- Athens
- Country
- Greece
We have never tried this in the history of mankind (unless you believe that Amazonesses existed).
Same in the Maroon culture that is based on Matrilineal lines; but with a man (a female-line descendant) in charge...Ancient Egypt was matrilineal, wherein descent to the throne is through the female line, this system was formal and legitimist from the beginning to the end of Pharaonic history.
https://www.quora.com/What-evidence-is-there-of-Matrilineality-in-Ancient-Egypt
I meant a monarchy where the throne is passed from mother to daughter.
The Norwegian royal family is more recent and a lot easier - if they had picked Maud to become the reigning queen, instead of her husband to become their reigning king:
1. Queen Maud (reign: 1905-1938; born princess Maud of Wales)
2. King Olav (reign: 1938-1991; born prince Alexander of Denmark - he would have started his reign almost 20 years earlier; only son of '1')
3. Queen Ragnhild (reign: 1991-2012; born princess of Norway; eldest daughter of '2')
4. Queen Ingeborg (reign: 2012-now; born Ingeborg Lorentzen; eldest daughter of '3')
Crown princess Victoria (born: Victoria Ragna Lorentzen Ribeiro (b. 19 December 1988); only child of '4')
Hereditary prince (presumptive): Prince Frederik (born: Frederik Sven Lorentzen Falcão (b. 28 September 2016)'; only child of Crown princess)
Although they would probably have picked Carl/Haakon's sister instead of him, had they wanted to start a matrilineal system, so assuming they would still pick a child of Frederick VIII of Denmark and princess Louise of Sweden that would be:
1. Queen Louise (reign: 1905-1906; born princess of Denmark - married to prince Frederick of Schaumburg-Lippe)
2. Queen Marie Luise (reign: 1906-1938; with regency by her father until 1915 (18 yrs); born princess of Schaumburg-Lippe; married to prince Friedrich Sigismund of Prussia; eldest daughter of '1')
3. Queen Louise Victoria (reign: 1938-2009; born princess of Prussia; married to Hans Reinhold; only daughter of '2')
4. King Manfred (reign: 2009 - now; born Manfred Reinhold; only child of '3')
It seems Manfred has no children and his uncle prince Friedrich Karl of Prussia didn't seem to have children by either of his two wives either; so we would need to look for the descendants of queen Louise (1)'s second daughter to find the crown prince. Louise's second daughter and youngest child, princess Stephanie, married prince Viktor Adolf of Bentheim and Steinfurt; their first son died in the war; their second son prince Christian is the current fürst of Bentheim and Steinfurt (aged 96).
It seems, he doesn't have children either, so we would need to go to the descendants of Louise's son, prince Christian of Schaumburg-Lippe, for the 'hereditary prince(ss)'. Prince Christian married princess Feodora of Denmark; and their eldest daughter is: princess Marie of Schaumburg-Lippe (b. 1945), who would be 'second in line' to the Norwegian throne in this scenario. No, husband or children are reported, so in that case, it would be her brothers prince Wilhelm, prince Waldemar and prince Harald and their descendants who would be next in line - with princess Desiree (b. 1974; only daughter of prince Wilhelm; being the one in her generation to take over the throne at some point).
The reality is though that we can't honestly trace how any would have turned out matrilineally.
Marriages very much shape the line. And the choice of who they married would likely have been very different if it was a matrilineal dynasty. Harald had to fight to marry his commoner bride. If his older sister had been the heiress, would she really have been allowed to wed her current husband. Or her children have married those they have either? Very unlikely. There would have been the same rule about the women marrying someone of at least noble blood, as there were on the men.
If in the UK Anne had been heir and not her brothers, she would never have married Mark. She would have faced the same demand for an 'acceptable blue blood groom' as her brother faced in marrying Diana.
The Brits would be even harder to trace depending on how far back we said the matrilineal line started.
We have never tried this in the history of mankind (unless you believe that Amazonesses existed).
I meant a monarchy where the throne is passed from mother to daughter.
The reality is though that we can't honestly trace how any would have turned out matrilineally.
Marriages very much shape the line. And the choice of who they married would likely have been very different if it was a matrilineal dynasty. Harald had to fight to marry his commoner bride. If his older sister had been the heiress, would she really have been allowed to wed her current husband. Or her children have married those they have either? Very unlikely. There would have been the same rule about the women marrying someone of at least noble blood, as there were on the men.
If in the UK Anne had been heir and not her brothers, she would never have married Mark. She would have faced the same demand for an 'acceptable blue blood groom' as her brother faced in marrying Diana.
The Brits would be even harder to trace depending on how far back we said the matrilineal line started.
So, Spain would be ruled by the royal house of Georgia