Welcome to the Historical Fiction Online forums: a friendly place to discuss, review and discover historical fiction.
If this is your first visit, please be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You will have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing posts, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

United Kingdom Changes It's Rules of Succession

SGM
Compulsive Reader
Posts: 699
Joined: March 2010

Post by SGM » Fri October 28th, 2011, 10:07 pm

[quote=""LoveHistory""]The law hasn't been changed officially yet. But it is in the works. I think these are good changes.[/quote]

As previously stated the changes can only be made in consultation with the Commonwealth countries. What has happened today is that said Commonwealth countries have concurred and opened the way for legislation either to be repealed or enacted to put the changes into effect. This decision requires changes not only to UK law but also different statutes in the Commonwealth countries over which the UK parliament has no control. It will be no easy process because it is not just a case of repealing the Act of Settlement and I am not sure whether anyone has as yet actually identified the amount of legislative change that will be required.

The provisions against the monarch or the heir to the throne marrying a Roman Catholic will probably also be removed.

But thanks for your approval!

"I've been to the official website of the British Monarchy and there's actually nothing about this change on it as of now, odd considering!"

It wasn't a decision taken by the Monarchy but by the government so the crown probably hasn't caught up with it which not at all surprising as she is away from home at the moment. Although the monarch still forms part of the sovereignity of the UK, the electorate has a rather more important role than it did in 1701.
Last edited by SGM on Fri October 28th, 2011, 10:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Currently reading - Emergence of a Nation State by Alan Smith

User avatar
princess garnet
Bibliophile
Posts: 1569
Joined: August 2008
Location: Maryland

Post by princess garnet » Sat October 29th, 2011, 2:33 am

From a royalty blog I read regularly--the Queen's take:
http://royalmusingsblogspotcom.blogspot ... -shes.html
Several other European countries have changed their succession laws well before this news.

User avatar
SonjaMarie
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 5688
Joined: August 2008
Location: Vashon, WA
Contact:

Post by SonjaMarie » Sat October 29th, 2011, 2:36 am

Now I want Will and Kate to have a girl :D

SM
The Lady Jane Grey Internet Museum
My Booksfree Queue

Original Join Date: Mar 2006
Previous Amount of Posts: 2,517
Books Read In 2014: 109 - June: 17 (May: 17)
Full List Here: http://www.historicalfictiononline.com/ ... p?p=114965

User avatar
Vanessa
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 4226
Joined: August 2008
Currently reading: The Farm at the Edge of the World by Sarah Vaughan
Interest in HF: The first historical novel I read was Katherine by Anya Seton and this sparked off my interest in this genre.
Favourite HF book: Gone with the Wind by Margaret Mitchell!
Preferred HF: Any
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Post by Vanessa » Sat October 29th, 2011, 10:31 am

Yes, so do I! Britain has usually done well under a female monarch. Three cheers for the ladies! :D
currently reading: My Books on Goodreads

Books are mirrors, you only see in them what you already have inside you ~ The Shadow of the Wind

User avatar
SonjaMarie
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 5688
Joined: August 2008
Location: Vashon, WA
Contact:

Post by SonjaMarie » Sat October 29th, 2011, 5:25 pm

It's their 6th month anniversary today (I read on Yahoo News). Congrats!

SM
The Lady Jane Grey Internet Museum
My Booksfree Queue

Original Join Date: Mar 2006
Previous Amount of Posts: 2,517
Books Read In 2014: 109 - June: 17 (May: 17)
Full List Here: http://www.historicalfictiononline.com/ ... p?p=114965

SGM
Compulsive Reader
Posts: 699
Joined: March 2010

Post by SGM » Sun October 30th, 2011, 8:10 am

[quote=""sweetpotatoboy""]That's what I thought was happening, but this Guardian article says otherwise, unless they got it wrong:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/oct/2 ... y-approved
It says Anne moves up to fourth.[/quote]

I think the question this quite correctly raises is -- what happens if William and Kate or Harry have no children (or no surviving children). In that case (although in these days less likely than in previous times), whose children would then have the right to be monarch? Would Andrew's and Edward's children still have precedence over Anne's simply because of their parent's gender? If the legislative changes mean that the rights of any descendents of Anne would prevail over the children of Andrew and Edward, that does effectively change the line of succession. Although as far as I can see, if Anne, Andrew and Edward were still alive, Andrew and Edward would still succeed before Anne.

I could be wrong, but as I have said the complexities involved are great, and that is one of the reasons it has taken us some time to get to this point -- a bit like reform of the House of Lords, if it had been easy it would have happened some time ago.

But with the existence of two generations of successors to QEII already in place, now would seem to be the time to make the change because in theory, the real expectations of anyone living are realistically likely to be changed.
Last edited by SGM on Sun October 30th, 2011, 8:41 am, edited 2 times in total.
Currently reading - Emergence of a Nation State by Alan Smith

User avatar
Vanessa
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 4226
Joined: August 2008
Currently reading: The Farm at the Edge of the World by Sarah Vaughan
Interest in HF: The first historical novel I read was Katherine by Anya Seton and this sparked off my interest in this genre.
Favourite HF book: Gone with the Wind by Margaret Mitchell!
Preferred HF: Any
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Post by Vanessa » Sun October 30th, 2011, 11:51 am

If William & Kate or Harry didn't have any children, Andrew would be king and then Beatrice, Eugenie, Edward, Louise and then Anne, as it stands. Of course, this would change if any of them had children/further children.
currently reading: My Books on Goodreads

Books are mirrors, you only see in them what you already have inside you ~ The Shadow of the Wind

SGM
Compulsive Reader
Posts: 699
Joined: March 2010

Post by SGM » Sun October 30th, 2011, 1:02 pm

[quote=""Vanessa""]If William & Kate or Harry didn't have any children, Andrew would be king and then Beatrice, Eugenie, Edward, Louise and then Anne, as it stands. Of course, this would change if any of them had children/further children.[/quote]

Of course, if Andew and Edward are still around but William and Harry are not and William and Harry have no descendents, then Andrew or Edward would take the crown before Anne as I said previously. That doesn't my answer my point, however, which was what happens if William or Harry have no descendents and but Andrew, Edward and Anne are no longer alive and do? Having changed the law in relation to William or Harry's children, it would really not be equitable several generations after the lawed changed the rule of primogeniture that Andrew and Edward's descendants should take precedence over Anne's. We would probably not be talking about Andrew, Edward or Anne's children but maybe their grandchildren or beyond.

I know it's difficult to grasp but the issue is potentially still there.

As you know, in the dispute between Henry VI and Edward IV, they looked back several generations to Edward III to argue the succession although I must admit I find Edward IV's a rather tortuous route. The succession after Anne (I am talking about the daughter of James II, here) looked back to the descendants of James VI and I.

Luckily, the situation is not likely to arise which is why now is a good time to make the change.
Last edited by SGM on Sun October 30th, 2011, 1:10 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Currently reading - Emergence of a Nation State by Alan Smith

User avatar
Vanessa
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 4226
Joined: August 2008
Currently reading: The Farm at the Edge of the World by Sarah Vaughan
Interest in HF: The first historical novel I read was Katherine by Anya Seton and this sparked off my interest in this genre.
Favourite HF book: Gone with the Wind by Margaret Mitchell!
Preferred HF: Any
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Post by Vanessa » Sun October 30th, 2011, 1:38 pm

Ah, I see what you mean. If that very unlikely situation occurred, they would have to look at it again and change the rule of succession for Andrew, Edward and Anne's children.
currently reading: My Books on Goodreads

Books are mirrors, you only see in them what you already have inside you ~ The Shadow of the Wind

User avatar
wendy
Compulsive Reader
Posts: 592
Joined: September 2010
Location: Charlotte, North Carolina
Contact:

Post by wendy » Sun October 30th, 2011, 2:51 pm

I'm sure they are now working on some scheme to allow Camilla to be crowned queen.

You have to admire how "the powers that be" change the rules to suit themselves and the current situation (- don't be shocked if they suddenly announce Kate is having a girl!)

Seems not much has changed since Henry VIII.
Wendy K. Perriman
Fire on Dark Water (Penguin, 2011)
http://www.wendyperriman.com
http://www.FireOnDarkWater.com

Post Reply

Return to “Chat”