As it was, the throne passed to his eldest son in 1913 only because the Bavarian parliament passed a law enabling him to depose Otto: hence, the early accession of King Ludwig III (while his cousin was still living). Had the law been passed sooner, Luitpold would have become king ...
The prince regent had (like Arthur) been born a third son, so was never really a *spare* to anything: as it was, he could have become the king of GREECE, had he been more aggressive in pursuing his claim to the throne there. After all, his brother (also named Otto) had no heir, since his marriage was childless.
As for Saxe-Coburg and Gotha: Arthur's own renunciation was not the only thing that stopped him from becoming the reigning duke. AFter all, his eldest brother (the then-Prince of Wales, future King Edward VII of Great Britain) had conditionally renounced his rights: succession would be reversionary.
Arthur of Connaught became the spare to the SCG throne, after his nephew's Alfred's death.
Had he not decided to renounce, he would have been a spare who would have succeed.
Although not a secons son but a third one.
Come to think of it, he (first cousin and husband of Queen Victoria of Great Britain) would count as a spare who would have succeeded if he had lived, since he (a second son) never renounced his rights to the duchy.
ADk Franz Karl of Habsburg was a spare that might have succeed- Instead he left the crown to his son Emperor Franz Josef I
ADk Otto was the spare who did not outlive his elder brother Franz Ferdinand, paving the way for his son Emperor Karl I.
Pr.Philippe of Belgium count of Flanders, was Leopold II's younger brother and heir but did not outlived him, so L.II was succeeded by nephew Albert I
August Wilhelm of Prussia, next brother of the childless Friederich II the Great, did not outlive his brother either.
Jaime de Borbon, duke of Segovia and Anjou, a second son who was forced to renounce his rights.
Message Thread
« Back to index