Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit, rollback
875
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 7:
Line 7: + + + + + +
no edit summary
Doesn't mention she is the British Head of State or that acts of parliament must be signed by her.
Doesn't mention she is the British Head of State or that acts of parliament must be signed by her.
*Yes, and the actual situation regarding her political power, or lack thereof, is somewhat more complicated than it appears, tying, as it does, into the history of the Civil War, the Reformation and so on. We'll have to see what we can do about that without straying off-topic. [[User:Stargrave|Stargrave]] 08:04, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
*Yes, and the actual situation regarding her political power, or lack thereof, is somewhat more complicated than it appears, tying, as it does, into the history of the Civil War, the Reformation and so on. We'll have to see what we can do about that without straying off-topic. [[User:Stargrave|Stargrave]] 08:04, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
==Male preference==
If nobody minds, I've deleted the reference to HM's original position in the line of succession being a result of the preference given to males. In her case it was irrelevant. Edward VIII and George VI were the oldest children of George V, and George VI had no sons. If there had been no preference for males, she still would have been third in line.
Interestingly, the last time the male preference made a difference was when Queen Victoria died in 1901, with the crown passing to her eldest son Edward VII. Victoria's eldest child was Princess Victoria who married the German Emperor - the whole of 20th century European history could have been very different! [[User:Ferret|Ferret]] 08:35, 6 July 2007 (EDT)