[Ansteorra] OT: Queen Elizabeth II - is NOT the rightful heir to the throne of England

[Tim McDaniel]

On Thu, 31 Jan 2013, Hillary Greenslade <hillaryrg at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Had to share, stubbled on this YouTube video of a documentary from May, 2013,
> titled: 'Queen Elizabeth II - is NOT the rightful heir to the throne of England'.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5fIwLo1Trs

My first thought was "Do we have to spray for Jacobites again?".

I am NOT trying to slag you, Hillary!  It's fine that you mention it.
The problem is that he's wrong in practice, and since practice
actually controls royal successions, ...

> Runs under an hour

Luckily, Googling quickly provided his theory, so I don't have to
watch all 48:18.  It's actually an infestation of mutated
quasi-Ricardians.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_successions_of_the_English_crown

And http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_IV_of_England#Controversy has
rebuttals.  "Under English common law a child born to a married woman
is presumed to be her husband's, although the husband may contest the
presumption.  Also, even if he were illegitimate, Edward still had a
direct (albeit legally barred) blood-claim to the throne through his
mother Cecily, who was a great-granddaughter of Edward III through
John of Gaunt and his illegitimate daughter (Cecily's mother) Joan
Beaufort, Countess of Westmorland."  And even whether the barring was
legal and the illegitimacy legal is questionable.

Certainly in practice, Edward IV and his heirs by birth and/or law
have usually had the overwhelming acceptance of the people in
practice, which is really the true source of monarchy, despite Tony
Robinson's nonsense of "The monarchy rests entirely on blood and
inheritance".  I am minded of the motton on the inside of the crowns
of Caid: "You rule because they believe".  It could just as justly be
engraved inside the crowns of the UK.

Danihel Lincolnia
-- 
Tim McDaniel, tmcd at panix.com