What % of Americans and Brits are "royalty"?

Every so often you read about how George W Bush is a 14th cousin of Queen Elizabeth or whatever. What percentage of the US and British population have a bloodine connection to the British royal family? Also, how close a relation to the Queen does one have to be to be considered “royalty”? Any tangible benefits of being considered “royalty” under British law (other than of course all you can eat swan buffets)?

Do you just mean the current royal family? there have been dzens of different families, only partly related or not at all, in the history of the British Isles. There were Swedish kings (I think), Danish kings, Celtic ones, Angls, Jutes, Saxons, Normans, and a couples dynasties since then.

Danes, Anglo-Saxons and Normans OK, but you’ll have to provide cites for the others if were talking about monarchs of all England or subsequent nations.

I can’t answer the OP, other than to say that there are no practical benefits of being related to the queen at the level of George W Bush.

Believe it or not, you can by a book to help you track down royalty blood lines. The name you ask? How about “The Complete Idiot’s Guide to British Royalty”? Order it from your favorite book seller! As far as percentages and there worth and what it could get you, I have zero clue, but I’d love to go to a swan buffet! :cool:

I know that in America, it just may mean you might stand a chance to make the tabloids if there was sufficient interest in a 5% royal blood, cattle farmer, selling dope to aliens, before they mutilate them in some sophomoric fashion.
:dubious:

6%

“Royalty,” in the strict sense of being able to inherit the throne, is explicitly defined in British law as being a lineal descendant of George II. By courtesy, spouses of royal persons are ordinarily regarded as part of the royal family.

Remember that Elizabth II and GWB have two parents, four grandparents, eight great-grandparents, etc. Elizabeth is queen because she is heir of line of George; wht her other ancestors may have been or not been doesn’t count towards her claim to “royalty.”

That GWB and Elizabeth may have been descended from le 8ieme Vicomte du Chien-sure-le-Vomite has absolutely no bearing on this. Thanks to two ancestors who kept track of their genealogy, I can demonstrate inheritance from Edward III of England, Owain Gwynedd of Wales, the Kings of Leinster, the early Capetians, Charlemagne, and Yaroslav, Grand Knyaz of Kiev. Doesn’t make me “royalty” – it merely means I share the distinction of descent from medieval kings with a lot of the world generally but have the advantage of being able to document it.

Cite?

Last time I checked, the succession to the British throne was governed by the Act of Settlement (1701), which specified that capacity to inherit is confined to heirs of the body of the Electress Sophia who are not and who have not married Catholics. <http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/2295/aos1.html>. If I remember correctly, The Electress Sophia was George II’s great-grandmother.

A list of all the people so eligible as at 1 January 2001 is found at <http://members.aol.com/eurostamm/succession_2001.html
> There are 4,583 of them. Note that (although they are all entitled to British citizenship under the *Sophia Naturalisation Act, many of them are not British.

Anyway, I doubt that these people all count as royalty. Most of them are legally commoners. According to <http://www.heraldica.org/faqs/britfaq.html#p2-2> there are only about 35 people considered members of the Royal family. According to <http://www.heraldica.org/faqs/britfaq.html#p2-26>, only the following people are entitled to the title ‘Royal Highness’:

• the children of a sovereign
• the children of sons of a sovereign (that is, grandchildren in the male line of a sovereign)
• the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales

It is also the correct style for the wives of those who are entitled to bear the style of HRH._ A widow does not lose the style of HRH upon her husband’s death, whereas a divorced wife loses the style of HRH following her divorce.

• Philip, Duke of Edinburgh (Letter Patent the day before his marriage).

At present, there are eighteen members of the Royal Family who are entitled to the style HRH:

  1. HRH The Prince of Wales (the child of a sovereign)
  2. HRH Prince William of Wales (the child of a son of a sovereign)
  3. HRH Prince Henry of Wales (the child of a son of a sovereign)
  4. HRH The Duke of York (the child of a sovereign)
  5. HRH Princess Beatrice of York (the child of a son of a sovereign)
  6. HRH Princess Eugenie of York (the child of a son of a sovereign)
  7. HRH The Earl of Wessex (the child of a sovereign)
  8. HRH The Countess of Wessex (the wife of a son of a sovereign)
  9. HRH The Princess Royal (the child of a sovereign)
  10. HRH Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester (the wife of a son of a sovereign)
  11. HRH The Duke of Gloucester (the child of a son of a sovereign)
  12. HRH The Duchess of Gloucester (the wife of a child of a son of a sovereign)
  13. HRH The Duke of Kent (the child of a son of a sovereign)
  14. HRH The Duchess of Kent (the wife of a child of a son of a sovereign)
  15. HRH Princess Alexandra, the Hon. Lady Ogilvy (the child of a son of a sovereign)
  16. HRH Prince Michael of Kent (the child of a son of a sovereign)
  17. HRH Princess Michael of Kent (the wife of a child of a son of a sovereign)
  18. HRH The Duke of Edinburgh
    REgards,
    Agback

I’m thinking of King Ralph

I once read that, statistically speaking, practically all people of ethnic English origins can claim descent from William the Conqueror - or any other person living in England at that time.

The percentage of US citizens who have a common ancestor with Queen Liz[sup]2[/sup] within the past 1500 years is nearly 100%. This includes Asian americans, etc. The most recent study I’ve seen based on simple math suggest at least 60%, but I found some very naive assumptions upon closer reading.

If you are of mainly European descent, a good genealogy search will reveal such a link without much effort in most cases. I have done this for myself (on my father’s and mother’s side) and for Mrs. FtG in the last few years.

Note: the chances of being descended from a random person living in England in 1066 is not very good. Most of those people died without having children or had their bloodline extinguished within a generation or two. Poor people are lousy vectors for DNA transmission. A lot of people in the recent past were kids who died young.

King Ralph was, of course, utter nonsense. Hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people would have to die before you would reach the point where you would have trouble finding out who would be next in succession to the throne. Besides, Ralph couldn’t have been in the succession anyway. In the movie it was claimed that his relation to the royal family went through an illegitimate birth, but the rule is that succession to the throne can only go through legitimate births.

Yep - it’s from the Electress Sophia. I think Polycarp was thinking of the Royal Marriages Act, which applies to descendents of George II.

Not anymore. The Sophia Naturalisation Act was repealed by the British Nationality Act 1948, so only people on the list born prior to 1948 are automatically entitled to British citizenship.

Not that I work for Debrett’s, or anything, but isn’t this list missing one person at least?

  1. HRH The Queen (the sovereign)

No, she’s HM The Queen.