2006-08-08 21:39:49 · 13 answers · asked by Roger B 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Royalty
The current rules of succession don't just mean primogeniture, they also mean that Parliament decides ultimately.
William's acsession was the result of Parliament saying 'if you decide to invade, we'll back you'.
Which set the precedent of Parliament acting as the kingmaker.
So who'd be monarch? It'd be someone competant.
2006-08-09 11:44:24 · answer #1 · answered by MontyBob 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
King LeBron James
2006-08-08 21:42:43 · answer #2 · answered by Petey 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Royal Water Closet Keeper(name unknown) would be the rightful heir to the throne.
2006-08-09 00:46:14 · answer #3 · answered by Bullwinkle Moose 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Just to point out that the queen is actually a German, the surname 'Windsor' was introduced in the first world war (I think), as Saxe-Koburg sounded a little too much like the enemy.. Odd, egh?
2006-08-09 05:54:09 · answer #4 · answered by Sossage 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There was a documentary on this, and it's some chap in Australia, who all for a Republic, and has a grandson called Jet.
Prince Jet, how cool is that?
2006-08-08 21:48:57 · answer #5 · answered by Thia 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Abney-Hastings%2C_14th_Earl_of_Loudoun
This chap would, Tony Robinson discovered this in 2004 in a documentary. Oddly enough though, hes a Republican and doesnt support the monarchy!
2006-08-10 01:34:37 · answer #6 · answered by afterbirth07 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Me. Or a family living in a farm in Australia. I prefer my claim to the throne.
2006-08-09 00:53:49 · answer #7 · answered by gr_bateman 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
King Kerry King would do me fine..slayaaaaarrrrrggghhhhhh
2006-08-08 21:45:24 · answer #8 · answered by hog4ubaby 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
the same family, any one with a better claim was killed such as Lady Jane Gray
2006-08-08 22:34:35 · answer #9 · answered by brinlarrr 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
apparently it's some bus conductor in Australia.
2006-08-08 21:44:33 · answer #10 · answered by scotsman 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋