The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (
-   British Royal History (
-   -   British Royal History: General Questions, Random Facts & Strange Quirks (

BritishRoyalist 07-11-2013 10:32 PM

British Royal History: General Questions, Random Facts & Strange Quirks

Was Queen Victoria the lowest ever in the Line of Succession to ascend to the Throne?

At the time of her birth in May 1819 Queen Victoria was fifth in line of the succession for the British Throne behind her father and three uncles.
Her father died ten months later on 23 January 1820 and she became fourth in line;
Six days later she became third in line for the Throne after her grandfather King George III died.
Her three uncles (George IV, Frederick and William IV) all died without surviving legitimate children.
She became 2nd in line for the Throne when Frederick died in 1827;
She became first in line for the Throne in 1830 when King George IV died;
Victoria's uncle King William IV died in 1837 and she became Queen.

She was initially Number 5 in line for the throne but moved up fast in the line of succession. So was Victoria the lowest person ever in the line of succession at birth (being fifth) to ascend to the Throne?

Victoria's path to the throne 1819-1837

1760 - Reign of King George III
1819 - birth of Princess Alexandrina Victoria of Kent and Strathearn (she is 5th in line after the Prince Regent and the Dukes of York, Clarence & Kent)
1820 - death of the Duke of Kent and Strathearn (now 4th after the Prince Regent, York & Clarence)
1820 - death of George III (3rd after York & Clarence)
1820 - birth of Princess Elizabeth of Clarence (4th after York, Clarence & Clarence)
1821 - death of Princess Elizabeth of Clarence (3rd after York & Clarence)
1827 - death of Prince Frederick, Duke of York and Albany (2nd after Clarence)
1830 - death of George IV (becomes heiress presumptive)
1837 - death of William IV; Victoria succeeds to the throne :crown5:

Iluvbertie 07-11-2013 10:53 PM

George II was about 53 or even lower when born behind his father and grandmother and the 50+ ahead of her when he was born in 1683.

When the Act of Settlement was passed in 1701 both she and he moved up ahead of over 50 people who were RCs.

So no Victoria wasn't the lowest ever - George II would have been and then George I.

Ish 07-11-2013 11:08 PM

I believe there were some 50-odd people excluded from the line of succession between Anne and George I.

Henry I would have been 4th in line at birth had the line followed primogeniture (which it didn't).

John had 4 elder living brothers when he was born, 3 of whom would have children (I'm not sure how far down he would have been bumped in the line).

At birth Henry IV was 4th in the succession if you don't count women and 5th if you do. Continuing to count female-line descendants (through Henry's uncle) he would have been 9th in the line of succession at the time of his grandfather's death.

If we include women, Richard III would have been something like 13th in the line of succession.

Warren 08-03-2013 01:13 AM

Thread originally a Queen Victoria spinoff but tarted up and re-named to broaden the subject base.

An Ard Ri 09-08-2013 04:17 PM

500th anniversary of the Battle of Flodden
500th anniversary of the Battle of Flodden

James IV of Scotland's defeat in 1513 by the English
on the 9th of September.

500th anniversary of the Battle of Flodden - the last time a British king died in battle | UK news |

From Wikipedia

Battle of Flodden - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

An Ard Ri 09-10-2013 05:37 AM

Battle Of Flodden Commemorated

Battle Of Flodden Commemorated - YouTube

An Ard Ri 09-19-2014 07:13 PM

The 10 best English queens in history

The 10 best English queens in history | History Extra

An Ard Ri 10-11-2014 07:55 AM

Video: Panel discussion - The German Kings who Made Britain

Video: Panel discussion - The German Kings who Made Britain

Humfrey 12-09-2014 05:41 AM

Can anyone identify this lady?
1 Attachment(s)
I am hoping someone will be able to identify this royal (or at least aristocratic) lady. Portrait painted about 1802.

Curryong 12-10-2014 04:26 AM

It's not Caroline of Brunswick, is it? There is a faint look of her in my opinion. The portrait would have been very idealised if so, but of course that's always possible!

Ana Von Cleves 12-11-2014 01:36 PM

I really don't think it's a royal. Just doesn't look it to me.

Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

Humfrey 12-18-2014 05:13 AM

She most resembles Lady Jersey, but she would probably have been too young to have been this person. The lady is believed to have royal connections, but not necessarily a direct member. She may even have been French or German.

Humfrey 01-06-2015 10:11 AM

1 Attachment(s)
A better version. She may be French - she resembles Louise Marie Adelaide a little.

Rocketmom 04-22-2015 09:32 PM

I wasn't sure where to post this but looked around and settled on this. If there is anyone who has knowledge of military history, I wondered about the British military salute. It is different from the salute of the U.S. military in that the British soldiers have their palm outward whereas the U.S. soldiers have their palm down. Does either way have significance?

An Ard Ri 05-02-2015 03:25 PM

5 royal births that rocked a nation

5 royal baby births in history that rocked a nation | History Extra

An Ard Ri 05-20-2015 06:29 PM

8 things you (probably) didn’t know about the Woodvilles

8 surprising facts about the Woodville family | History Extra

GrahamM 06-12-2015 08:17 AM

Vera Bate Lombardi
She was reputedly the illegitimate daughter of Prince Adolphus, 2nd Duke of Teck and 1st Marquess of Cambridge, by Rosa Baring. I have managed to work out how these two probably knew each other and why they might have met at the time around Vera's conception. I have amended her Wikipedia article accordingly. See:

I have also realized that Vera might have acted as a go-between between Churchill and Mussolini during WW2. I have also added this to the article.

I would welcome people's views on these matters.

PS I have also found that Vera was described as 'adopted' in the 1891 census. This is the first official indication that she was not the legitimate issue of her legal parents.

GrahamM 06-22-2015 11:54 AM

Don't use Wikipedia article
I have had to abandon the Wikipedia article due to interference from 'editors' who know nothing of the subject matter. The article can now be found at:

An Ard Ri 08-17-2015 06:56 AM

How the Tudors invented breakfast!

How the Tudors invented breakfast | History Extra

An Ard Ri 08-17-2015 02:56 PM

How many English kings were known as ‘the Great’?

How many English kings were known as ‘the Great’? | History Extra

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:55 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018
Jelsoft Enterprises