The monarchic system polished for centuriesThe inheritance of power is arranged, it would seem, solidly and reliably. "God's anointed", if no one claims to take his place, there is nothing to worry about - scandalous resignations, impeachment and other troubles to him (unlike the elected head of government or state) do not threaten.
Know yourself, sit on the throne until the end of the century, andif you get bored - passed the monarch duties together with the regalia to the heir and enjoy the well-deserved rest! In most cases, this is exactly what happens (a very recent example is the "resignation" of the Queen of the Netherlands), but there is something called the "dynastic crisis," and this phenomenon can undercut the root of the most powerful and eminent monarchy ... What is this attack , why such an expression resembling a disappointing medical diagnosis?
The dynastic crisis is, in a nutshell,lack of successor. The same heir to the throne, that having become a full-fledged king (king, emperor, sultan, etc.), will not allow the suppression of the monarch's dynasty, to which he himself belongs. But the reasons why this smooth transfer of power may not take place, a great many, only one in any case remains immutable - this situation always brings with it chaos and confusion, and in some cases calls into question the very existence of a state suddenly left without a supreme lords.
As, for example, there would be a destiny of empireAlexander the Great, if this Macedonian king, who became the ruler of numerous lands and peoples, took care of the successor before he died on the way back from India? But Alexander died suddenly, and his empire collapsed into several hostile kingdoms, which in turn also did not last long. Thus, two dynasties were interrupted at once: the modest Macedonian, the crown of which Alexander inherited, and the one whose founder he became; they ended it.
And here is an example of how a dynastic crisis has plungedin confusion another empire - British. In 1936, King Edward VIII entered the throne in accordance with all the rules, but he reigned for a short time, some 10 months, and then renounced the monarch's order in favor of his younger brother (the father of the present Queen Elizabeth). This was preceded by a grand scandal, because the reason for everything was a woman - not only that, a foreigner, so also divorced. What a horror for a kind, old England! Edward could not marry her at the rank of King, but he did not want to leave her, being a gentleman, preferring to part with the throne.
The definition of the crisis as "innatedisease, "as an inevitable risk factor inherent in the monarchical system itself, finds confirmation not only in historical facts, but also in culture - from fairy tales and legends to paintings by artists and playwrights. unexpected scenes - both tragic and truly comedic.
And as long as there are monarchies, as long as their fate is decided by the Great, Horrible (and sometimes Funny) dynastic crisis, these stories will not be exhausted.
