What happens if the Jacobites regain the English Throne?

Let’s say sometime next week we have the most eventful early afternoon in human history. Through this all Prince Joseph Wenzel, heir successor to the Principality of Liechtenstein and Jacobite claimant to thrones of England, Scotland, France, and Ireland, winds up in Buckingham Palace. I know he is only 13 right now and actually third in line (to a throne no one in the bloodline has claimed for 200 years), but combining the royalty of Liechtenstein and UK into one Go sounds nifty. Ignore it if you want, the question here is what if the Jacobites actually did get their Bonnie Prince Joey coronated as British monarch? Other than enough “rubbing it in” for the past 200 years does anything become any different?

:eek: A Papist?! :eek:

The UK has had past periods of their monarchy also being the sovereigns of other kingdoms (it’s what put the U to the K in fact) so that wouldn’t be an unprecedented problem. As far as I know, Liechtenstein and the UK don’t have any significant issues between them so no problems arise there.

Other than that, SSDD (Same System of government; Different Dynasty). If Joseph Wenzel tried to change things too much then the Stuarts go zero for three.

There’s a few foreign monarchs in the British line of succession–The Kings of Norway and Sweden, and the Queens of Denmark and the Netherlands are all in line (I believe King Harald of Norway is the foreign sovereign highest in line for the throne, but I could be wrong).

I’m not terribly knowledgeable about royal politics, but in order to place a Jacobite on the throne, wouldn’t the Act of Settlement have to be thrown out entirely? Since Prince Joseph is Catholic and not an heir of Electress Sophia, he’s not eligible under the current rules, right?

But this points to a question I was actually planning on posting here that might tie in with the original question–what would happen if everyone in the current line of succession died? I realize the odds of 1300 people dispersed throughout the world simultaneously expiring are as near to nothing as we’re going to get, but it’s just a hypothetical. Would the line of succession descend on another dynasty, like the Jacobites? Or is it such an unprecedented occurrence that there’s no precedent?

That one I can answer: John Goodman ;).

Well, let’s take a look:

The official top 40 list from the Royal Family’s web site.

Wikipedia’s list, with HNH Harald V at #61.

The Rt. Rev. Rowan Williams is going to have a real bad day.

Excellent article! Thanks for that list!

(I’m a 46th cousin, 6 times removed, from Prince William. I guess I’m further down on the list)

I find this slightly odd:
10. Mr. Peter Phillips
11. Miss Zara Phillips

No titles or honourifics at all for these two? Why? :confused:

This question was raised at the time, and allegedly it’s because Princess Anne didn’t want them having one (they are not entitled to anything from the mother’s side). Or possibly the Royals baulked at giving a peerage to Captain Mark ‘Foggy’ [because he’s thick and wet] Philips as they had to do for Lord Snowden

You do realize that in order to know whom your 46th cousin is, you have to know whom your ancestors from about 1500 years ago are.

Zev Steinhardt

From Wikipedia

Children inherit their titles from their fathers. As a grandchild in the female line (since Peter and Zara are daughters of the Princess Royal) they aren’t entitled to use HRH. Since Mark Phillips declined a peerage, his children don’t have one to inherit from him when he dies.

Of course, the queen could give them a peerage if she (and they) wanted.

Zev Steinhardt

Sure, but there are also Knighthoods and other honourifics, too.

I know we harp on about this, but I think in a place like GQ it’s important to remember that the terms “English” and “British” are not interchangeable. Indeed I think there’s rarely any reason to refer to the “English” monarchy or the “Queen of England” when you’re talking about anything that happened after 1707 at the latest.

You’re right, my finger slipped. That’s 26th cousin, 6 times removed.

Our common ancestor flourished in the 14th century.

I do have some lines that go back over 1500 years, via Byzantine empire lineage, however.

You and everyone else alive today. :slight_smile:

You and just about everyone else alive today. :smiley:

I’ve heard it estimated that everyone alive today is 50th cousins or better of everyone else. This gets into the concept of most recent common ancestor.

Probably further back than that. A 50th cousin would have had a common ancestor about 1650 years ago. Maybe everyone from a specific region could have had a common ancestor that recent, but I highly doubt that everyone in the world has a common ancestor that recent.

Zev Steinhardt

“Is it hot in here, or is it just you” doesn’t count.

Returning to the original question, “What would be the point?”. What possible argument could anyone produce for putting them back into the Succession, if you were going to change things in such a drastic fashion the case for a republican form of government would be made far more forcefully by the Left.

Lots of Windsor heads on pikes?