Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

"Aussie Mike" The Real Monarch of Britain?
 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Gargoyle View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 25-May-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 681 		  Quote Gargoyle Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: "Aussie Mike" The Real Monarch of Britain?
    Posted: 19-Feb-2007 at 11:40

Hello Friends

I was just Wondering if any of you have seen the TV programme concerning the Very possible Illegitimacy of the English King Edward IV, and thus All of his descendants!

Here is some interesting Information.....

http://www.serendipity.li/more/monarch.htm

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/aussie-mike-the-true-king-of-england/2005/09/10/1125772732666.html

So..... what do you think about that!


   
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035 		  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Feb-2007 at 13:26
 
Originally posted by Gargoyle


Hello Friends

I was just Wondering if any of you have seen the TV programme concerning the Very possible Illegitimacy of the English King Edward IV, and thus All of his descendants!

Here is some interesting Information.....

http://www.serendipity.li/more/monarch.htm

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/aussie-mike-the-true-king-of-england/2005/09/10/1125772732666.html

So..... what do you think about that!
    
 
From the first link:
"A legitimate claimant to the English throne must be descended from Henry II (reigned 1154-1189) in an unbroken line of descent in which all members were born legitimately, that is, their parents were married at the time of their birth. If a line of descent passes through someone who was born out of wedlock then no descendant of that person has a legitimate claim to the throne of England."
 
That is totally untrue. The Act of Settlement of 1701 named the Electress Sophia of Hanover to succeed Queen Anne. Snce she died before Anne, the crown passed to her son George, who became George I, and whose totally legitimate heir the present Queen is.
 
The Scottish situation is somewhat different in detail, but was brought into line with the English as part of the Act of Union of 1707.
 
Parliament decides who is to be King or Queen of England and Scotland, not some hoary old tradition.
 


Edited by gcle2003 - 19-Feb-2007 at 13:27
Back to Top
chimera View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 25-Jan-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 131 		  Quote chimera Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Feb-2007 at 16:25
Yes, indeed, and they have placed George IV from Texas as true and undisputed monarch. I dub you "Dubya".
chimera
Back to Top
Gargoyle View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 25-May-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 681 		  Quote Gargoyle Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Feb-2007 at 21:54

Originally posted by gcle2003

Parliament decides who is to be King or Queen of England and Scotland, not some hoary old tradition.


That is a good point gcle2003. The Parliament of England passed the Act of Settlement 1701, whereunder the Electress Sophia was designated heir to the British Throne if the then-reigning monarch William III and his sister-in-law Princess Anne of Denmark (the later Queen Anne) both died without issue. The succession was so designed because Electress Sophia was the closest Protestant relative of the British Royal Family. Numerous Catholics with superior hereditary claims were bypassed.

But this is all irrelevant if Edward IV was Illegitamate, because it means that all of his descendants are also Illegitamate!

There is more good information on Wikipedia (you just have to search for it though):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britain%27s_Real_Monarch

I just think it is an interesting theory and quite Amusing! British Royalty and Nobility always Amuses me.


Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035 		  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Feb-2007 at 07:04
 
Originally posted by Gargoyle


Originally posted by gcle2003

Parliament decides who is to be King or Queen of England and Scotland, not some hoary old tradition.


That is a good point gcle2003. The Parliament of England passed the Act of Settlement 1701, whereunder the Electress Sophia was designated heir to the British Throne if the then-reigning monarch William III and his sister-in-law Princess Anne of Denmark (the later Queen Anne) both died without issue. The succession was so designed because Electress Sophia was the closest Protestant relative of the British Royal Family. Numerous Catholics with superior hereditary claims were bypassed.

But this is all irrelevant if Edward IV was Illegitamate, because it means that all of his descendants are also Illegitamate!

There is more good information on Wikipedia (you just have to search for it though):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britain%27s_Real_Monarch

I just think it is an interesting theory and quite Amusing! British Royalty and Nobility always Amuses me.


Amusing yes. Correct no. Load of rubbish, yes.
 
The point is if Parliament wants to settle the succession on an illegitimate descendant it is perfectly empowered to do so. The illegitimacy is irrelevant.
 
Not only that, but none of the successors to Edward IV, except his son Edward V whi died as a child, is a descendant of Edward IV anyway, legitimate or illegitimate.
 
The present Queen's descent is from Edward III not Edward IV.
 
 
Back to Top
Gargoyle View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 25-May-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 681 		  Quote Gargoyle Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Feb-2007 at 20:55

Not only are you Correct gcle2003, but this proves why you are one of the Greatest Members of AE-Forum..... You are Very Knowledgable!

One is Beginning to Question WHY One began this Thread in the First Place! It was an interesting TV program anyway...



Back to Top
chimera View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 25-Jan-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 131 		  Quote chimera Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Feb-2007 at 21:07
But for laughs, why couldn't Princess Margaret have been Queen, and the monarchy would have gone out with a bang.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.