The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #141  
Old 03-18-2015, 03:36 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Woodland Park, United States
Posts: 7
But that didn't happen and it is only supposition. The date of death for all of them is fact.

Quote:
Originally Posted by crm2317 View Post
If Edward VIII had remained childless his next brother in line was Prince Albert who became King George VI so the Queen would still become Queen as she is today. Prince Henry, Duke of Gloucester was younger than Prince Albert, followed by Prince George Duke of Kent.
Three were four sons. Edward VIII who died in 1972. Albert died in 1952, John died 1919 and Henry died in 1974. Assuming that Edward did not marry Wallis and had no children, upon his death in 1972, Henry would have succeeded until his death two years later. His son Richard born in 1944 would be King today. Unfortunately, Elizabeth would not have reigned.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 03-18-2015, 03:45 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,457
It would have been the same. From what I have read Edward was a traitor passing information to the Germans. He was very lucky to have been given the option of abdicating. He could just as easily been hanged.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 03-18-2015, 03:45 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 5,779
Elizabeth would have become Queen in 1972 because she was higher in the line of succession. The children of Prince Albert came before the Duke of Gloucester.
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 03-18-2015, 03:50 PM
crm2317's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Belfast, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,290
Quote:
Originally Posted by Donald P View Post
Three were four sons. Edward VIII who died in 1972. Albert died in 1952, John died 1919 and Henry died in 1974. Assuming that Edward did not marry Wallis and had no children, upon his death in 1972, Henry would have succeeded until his death two years later. His son Richard born in 1944 would be King today. Unfortunately, Elizabeth would not have reigned.

I am pretty sure you are wrong. Even with Prince Albert pre-decreasing his brother the throne would still have passed to his line before the line of Prince Henry. The throne would pass to King Edward's niece, Princess Elizabeth of York.

Similarly when King William IV died the throne passed to his niece Princess Victoria who was the daughter of his next youngest brother who had died years before. This was despite William's brothers Ernest, Augustus and Adolophus still being alive.
__________________
God Save the House of Windsor
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 03-18-2015, 03:51 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Woodland Park, United States
Posts: 7
I am sorry, I don't get it. If Edward did not abdicate, he would have been King until 1972. Albert died in 1952 so he would never have reigned. The Duke of Gloucester was Edward's only surviving sibling and died in 1974. He would have ruled for only two years and be suceeded by his son Richard.

Quote:
Originally Posted by crm2317 View Post
I am pretty sure you are wrong. Even with Prince Albert pre-decreasing his brother the throne would still have passed to his line before the line of Prince Henry. The throne would pass to King Edward's niece, Princess Elizabeth of York.

Similarly when King William IV died the throne passed to his niece Princess Victoria who was the daughter of his next youngest brother who had died years before. This was despite William's brothers Ernest, Augustus and Adolophus still being alive.
I don't know why the throne would have passed to niece when a brother was still alive but I am certainly no authority on royal succession!
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 03-18-2015, 03:55 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 5,779
^^^ Because his niece was higher in the line of succession. Prince Elizabeth before the Duke of Gloucester
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 03-18-2015, 03:58 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Woodland Park, United States
Posts: 7
Succession

She was not even in the line of succession! Her father would not have been King. Edvard's brother Henry was a direct descendent of a King.
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 03-18-2015, 04:00 PM
Kit's Avatar
Kit Kit is offline
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 852
That's correct! Elizabeth would have become Queen because she was higher in the succession than her uncle the Duke of Gloucester.
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 03-18-2015, 04:06 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,957
Quote:
Originally Posted by Donald P View Post
She was not even in the line of succession! Her father would not have been King. Edvard's brother Henry was a direct descendent of a King.
Her father not becoming king would have no difference.

Succession works through primogeniture - So Edward, Albert, Henry, George.

IF they had all lived till Edward's death in 1972 the order would have been

Edward Albert Elizabeth MArgaret Henry William Richard George Edward Michael Alexandra.

Take that list and delete all those who were dead in 1972 and Elizabeth would be next in line
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old 03-18-2015, 04:11 PM
Kit's Avatar
Kit Kit is offline
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 852
Quote:
Originally Posted by cepe View Post
Her father not becoming king would have no difference.



Succession works through primogeniture - So Edward, Albert, Henry, George.



IF they had all lived till Edward's death in 1972 the order would have been



Edward Albert Elizabeth MArgaret Henry William Richard George Edward Michael Alexandra.



Take that list and delete all those who were dead in 1972 and Elizabeth would be next in line

Absolutely correct!
Reply With Quote
  #151  
Old 03-18-2015, 04:14 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 11,015
If I may add an example to explain why Elizabeth would still have succeeded ahead of her Uncle Henry.


George III had a number of sons. The first five in order:


George, Frederick, William, Edward and Ernest.


George IV died in 1820, Frederick in 1828, William IV in 1837, Edward in 1819 so Ernest was the eldest living brother when William IV died but he didn't inherit the throne. Edward's daughter Victoria inherited because she was the daughter of the 4th son while Ernest was the 5th son.


The same thing would have happened in the case of Edward VIII remaining King and childless and the Duke of York dying in 1952. As he was the second son, his children and grandchildren would have inherited before the third son and his descendants.


Just as today - if Charles predeceases his mother - the next in line is William as Charles' son not Andrew as the next brother.


The line goes through each successive child in order so ALL of Charles' descendants are ahead of any of Andrew's who are ahead of any of Edward's etc.
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 03-18-2015, 04:16 PM
BritishRoyalist's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Somewhere, United States
Posts: 878
Quote:
Originally Posted by Donald P View Post
She was not even in the line of succession! Her father would not have been King. Edvard's brother Henry was a direct descendent of a King.
As was Princess Elizabeth. She was the daughter of George V next surviving son Albert.

I don't get why you having such a hard time understanding this. Britain does not have the same succession law like Saudi.

May I ask how old you are?
__________________
Long Live the Queen!! The Real Queen of Hearts!
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 03-18-2015, 04:22 PM
Tilia C.'s Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: O, Germany
Posts: 4,712
When Edward was King the line of succession looked like this:
1. the Duke of York (Bertie)
2. Princess Elizabeth
3. Princess Margaret Rose
4. the Duke of Gloucester
5. ...

If the no. 1 dies, everybody else climbs up in the line of succession: Princess Elizabeth becomes the heir, no matter how many living uncles there are. Children don't drop out of the succession when their parent dies.

I would have been similar as withQueen Victoria: her father, the Duke of Kent, was already dead when her uncle King William IV died. Victoria succeeded to the British throne, although there were still living younger brothers of her father. The succession to the Hannoverian throne went differently, because the Kingdom of Hannover did not allow for women to inherit. But the British throne could not be taken away from Victoria.
__________________
Please vote in our TRF Fashion Polls


Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 03-18-2015, 04:35 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 11,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Donald P View Post
She was not even in the line of succession! Her father would not have been King. Edvard's brother Henry was a direct descendent of a King.
The moment Elizabeth was born she was 3rd in the line of succession - ahead of her Uncle Henry. When Margaret was born Henry was pushed down the line even further to 5th. When her grandfather died in January 1936 she went up to 2nd in line behind her father. She remained 2nd throughout her uncle's reign and had he not abdicated would have remained 2nd unless he married and had his own children. If he remained childless she would have moved up to heiress presumptive when her father died in 1952.

In the UK women have been in the line of succession for centuries, with only the case of younger brothers replacing them - and that it about to change anyway.

Elizabeth was even touted as a future monarch by the media at the time of her birth - in the Guardian I think it was.

The present line of succession is:

Charles - William - George - Henry - Andrew - Beatrice - Eugenie - Edward - James - Louise - Anne - Peter - Savannah - Isla - Zara - Mia and then to Margaret's children and grandchildren, then Henry's son and his children and grandchildren etc. Those in bold are all the children of a monarch. Those in italics are the great-grandchildren of The Queen.

The line is set and if someone dies the rest move up e.g. when Princess Margaret died her children and grandchildren moved up a place and then have moved down places with the births of Edward's children and now the Queen's great-grandchildren.

The line goes down ONE child's descendants in their entirety before returning to the next child.

In the UK the line of succession is set with people moving up and down depending on the births and deaths of others ahead of them but once in the line a person lower in the line can't move ahead e.g. Harry can't move ahead of George because George is William's child and William is older than Harry. Andrew can't move ahead of Harry because Harry is Charles' child and Charles is older than Andrew.
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 03-18-2015, 04:55 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Woodland Park, United States
Posts: 7
Thank you. I really misunderstood and appreciate your clarity on the matter. I am sorry.

Regards,
Don
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 03-18-2015, 05:01 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 5,779
A day doesn't go by that I don't learn something new of this forum. No apologies needed :)
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 03-18-2015, 05:27 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 18,405
Quote:
Originally Posted by Donald P View Post
But that didn't happen and it is only supposition. The date of death for all of them is fact.
Well Edward abdicated, so this entire thread is supposition because none of it actually happened.

It's all a guess, and I guess that Edward may have died earlier because of the stress of being King and his younger brother would have died later because he hadn't had the stress of being King.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 03-18-2015, 05:28 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Woodland Park, United States
Posts: 7
This is all heresay nonsense. History can't decide that. Maybe Edward would have thrived as kind and maybe George would have died of boredom. Your arguments are useless.
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 03-18-2015, 06:04 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 18,405
As are yours now but there's no need to be rude.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 05-18-2015, 01:11 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: London, Canada
Posts: 46
iowabelle, if that happened, I think Diana would've been still alive today.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
abdication, duchess of windsor, duke of edinburgh, duke of windsor, edward viii, line of succession, princess elizabeth, styles and titles, titles, wallis simpson


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Difference Between Regent and Monarch? Melania Royalty Past, Present, and Future 14 10-09-2016 07:06 AM
Best future European monarch The Watcher Royal Chit Chat 83 08-27-2013 06:30 PM




Popular Tags
best outfit birthday carl gustaf chris o'neill crown princess mary crown princess victoria crown princess victoria daytime fashion current events denmark duchess of cornwall fashion poll general news hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume infanta cristina infanta leonor infanta sofia iñaki urdangarín king felipe king felipe vi king philippe king willem-alexander letizia liechtenstein monarchy nassau news november 2016 october 2016 picture of the week prince alexander prince carl philip prince daniel prince felix prince gabriel prince nicholas prince oscar princess claire of luxembourg princess estelle princess leonore princess madeleine princess mary princess of asturias princess sofia princess victoria queen anne-marie queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen mathilde queen mathilde daytime fashion queen mathilde fashion queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen rania casual outfit queen rania in new zealand queen silvia state visit stephanie sweden swedish royal family vatican victoria



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:03 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017
Jelsoft Enterprises