Friday, October 28, 2011

The Woman Who Would Be Queen

Bye-Bye Primogeniture

The process has been started to allow the first born child of the British Sovereign to become the next King/Queen, not just the male ones. Meaning we would be looking at a Princess of Wales these days....
From The the UK Guardian : Commonwealth leaders will pledge to amend legislation dating back to the 17th century to allow daughters of the monarch to take precedence over younger sons in the line of succession.David Cameron will hail the agreement of the 16 Queen's realms, the Commonwealth countries where the Queen serves as head of state, to amend "outdated" rules that also prevent a potential monarch from marrying a Catholic. 
The prime minister will introduce legislation in Britain before the next general election to ensure that the changes will apply to any children of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. Officials say the changes will apply even if a child is born before the new legislation is passed.
Speaking before the opening of the Commonwealth heads of government meeting in Perth, where the agreement will be sealed, Cameron said: "These rules are outdated and need to change."
In a meeting in Perth this morning, to be chaired by the Australian prime minister, Julia Gillard, the leaders of the 16 Queen's realms will agree to amend rules that currently say"


Downing Street has noted what would have happened if the rules had been different at key moments:

• Margaret Tudor would have succeeded Henry VII in 1509, denying the throne to her younger brother, who became Henry VIII. That raises the prospect that Henry VIII would not have been responsible for the greatest example of Euroscepticism: the break with Rome in 1533.
• Elizabeth Stuart, the Winter Queen of Bohemia, would have succeeded her father James I in 1625 instead of Charles I. The civil war, in which Charles was executed, might have been avoided.
• Queen Victoria's daughter, Princess Victoria, would have succeeded in January 1901, rather than Edward VII. The new queen would have died less than seven months later, handing the throne to Kaiser Wilhelm II. Britain would have been ruled by the German emperor during the first world war.

1 comment:

b said...

Most excellent! And I read it here first.

But if this had been in place back during the Reformation, it wouldn't be necessary to change the rule about marrying those bead rattlers of yours, would it?