A Royal Win for a Royal Baby

Royal Fever is peaking again as the long-awaited pregnancy of our favorite royal couple, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge (Will and Kate, as I like to call them), draws near.

While Official Britain is planning commemorative coins, and less-official Britain will take your bet on everything from the baby’s name and weight to hair color and exact time of birth, the one question with actual important ramifications is this: are we about to see the birth of the future queen of the United Kingdom?

The Throne is no stranger to strong female leaders. Its two longest reigning monarchs are Queen Victoria (no, not Vicky “Posh” B!), who reigned for over 63 years from 1837 to 1901. And of course the current monarch, Queen Elizabeth II, who recently celebrated her 61^st year on the throne. But after that, the crown passes back to the men – first to Prince Charles, and subsequently to his elder son, Prince William.

William and Catherine’s first child will be Will’s successor on the British Throne, regardless of gender. But this would not have been the case just a few months ago.  Here’s what you need to know about British male primogeniture and the new law for a modern monarch – and why Britain really has been a breeding ground for #GirlPower.

With Britain’s history of powerful leading ladies, it may surprise some of us outside of the U.K. that royal males have always received preference over their older female siblings. This practice can be attributed to English Common Law. The fact that male primogeniture derived its basis from centuries of accumulated law created a rocky road for legislators who sought to amend this tradition. In order to change a law, one must know which law(s) to change.  The British legislature assessed no less than 9 individual laws in search of their guilty parties. Three changed laws include the 1701 Act of Settlement, the 1689 Bill of Rights, and the 1772 Royal Marriages Act.

History may not be changeable, but some still dare to speculate “what if.” This is a time you’ll be thankful you paid attention in your European History classes. The BBC asked daringly: “What if equal rights to the throne had existed in the past?” and came up with some stimulating food for thought. Henry VIII – Mr. Excess, Wives, and Rock ‘n’ Roll – would have bowed to his older sister, Margaret, his queen. Henry VIII’s reign famously marked the founding of the Church of England and all the conflicts that came with it.

The thrones of the United Kingdom and Germany – enemies during World Wars I and II – would have joined in the 19th century through Queen Victoria’s eldest daughter. Her son was German Kaiser Wilhelm II. Now, how’s that for thought-provoking?

So now that we’ve history nerded out taken a peek into the past, both factual and hypothetical, let’s look to more recent events.

The British government received final formal approval for the change from all 16 Commonwealth Realms on December 4, 2012. Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg stated, “The Government will soon introduce the Succession to the Crown Bill which will make our old fashioned rules fit for the 21^st Century.”  He acknowledged the timeliness of the bill, enjoying the official report of the Duchess’s pregnancy: “We can also all celebrate that whether the baby is a boy or a girl, they will have an equal claim to the throne. It’s a wonderful coincidence that the final confirmation from the other realms arrived on the very day that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge made their announcement.”

The bill was published days later on December 13 and sent to the Houses of Parliament for multiple readings and revisions. After passing both Houses, the bill received Royal Assent (formal approval and decree by the monarch) on April 25, 2013.

So, what does this mean?

Basically, the Succession to the Crown Act entails three things. First, as we know, the eldest child of a monarch, regardless of gender, will succeed him or her on the British Throne. Younger brothers will no longer displace older sisters in the line of succession. There we go with that #girlpower again.

Second, marriage to a Roman Catholic was previously grounds for disqualification for succession; this act now nullifies that statute.

Third and finally, with the repeal of the Royal Marriages Act, this law will end the rule that required the monarch’s consent for any descendant of George II to marry. Think about all those fairy tale princes who were forced to throw balls to choose who they could marry – no longer! However, this rule will still apply to a small, select group of the monarch’s close family members. Okay, so some balls, for these reasons, still stand.

Important note: these rulings are not retroactive and apply to royals descended from Charles, the Prince of Wales.

Congratulations to the Duke and Duchess, the British population, and the soon-to-be addition to the Royal Family – the future Queen (or King) of the United Kingdom. Let’s celebrate with a nice cup of gender equality. But since we’re talking about England, a big kettle of Earl Grey is nice, too!

Interested in reading the full Succession to the Crown Act? You’re just as nerdy as we are. Read the official text here.

By