[ SECRET POST #5310 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5310 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 20 secrets from Secret Submission Post #760.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I mean, if Charles dies or couldn't take the throne for some reason before the Queen dies or steps down - then titles wouldn't even matter since the next in line would be Andrew unless he gets challenged by Anne or Edward (technically it could be Anne, but I don't think they got round to getting rid of the male heir first rule so idk - plus I don't see her being interested in fighting for the throne).

I suppose Harry and Megan's kids could get the royal titles in a Kind Hearts and Coronets situation, but that's on an extreme end.

be funny to watch tho.

[(Anonymous)]

The next in line would be William, wouldn’t it? *confused*

[(Anonymous)]

William is Charles' son and although he has the title now, its with the assumption that Charles will be crowned king (in which case whatever happens afterwards, William then Harry would be next in line). But if Charles is like dead or for some reason refuses to take the crown, it will go to his next sibling which would be Andrew - in which case he and his children would be in line for the throne instead of William and Harry.

[(Anonymous)]

No, you're mistaken. William is next in line after Charles.

[(Anonymous)]

Anne, Andrew and Edward were born before William, and if Charles didn't live to officially become king before the queen's reign ends then they and their children would be next in line.

[(Anonymous)]

That is not how the British line of succession works. All of Charles’ heirs would have to be deceased as well in order for Andrew to become king (thank goodness).

[tree_and_leaf]

Exactly (on both points. I think *Anne* would probably be quite a good monarch, though I also think she'd hate it, but Andrew.... sheesh, what a hideous thought).

[(Anonymous)]

No, that's not how the line of succession works. All of Charles' heirs would be in line before any of his siblings, because he's the oldest son.

[(Anonymous)]

NA

No, that's not the way the succession works. Since Charles had issue, they would be next in line, even if he were to die before he could take the crown. And if, in the case of Charles dying, William were to die before taking the crown, it would be George, though he would have a regent until he was of age. As it stands now, after George would be Charlotte, then Louis, then Harry, then Archie, then Lilibet, then and only then would it be Andrew (not Anne, because the change from male-preference is not retroactive), then Beatrice, then Eugenie, then August. Eugenie and August will move down once Beatrice's child is born. If William has another child, everyone past Louis moves down. If Harry has another child, everyone past Lilibet moves down.

[(Anonymous)]

^ This person understands how the British line of succession works.

[(Anonymous)]

No, if Charles dies then Prince William becomes king. And they did get around to getting rid of the male heir rule.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah William would become king AFTER Charles becomes king - right now Queen Elizabeth is on the throne and if something happens to Charles before the end of her rule THAT would change who would get to go next.

And if you're right then Anne would be next in line instead of Andrew - unless Anne, Andrew and Edward all agree for William to have the throne instead of them in this very hypothetical scenario (which lol I do not see Andrew giving up so easily).

[(Anonymous)]

The rule was changed before Prince George was born, but it wasn’t retroactive. It only applies going forward. So if something happened to George, Charlotte would be next in line, not Louis. It doesn’t apply to Anne, or even to Edward and Sophie’s kids.

But as far as the line of succession changing to Andrew if Charles died before coming king, that would only happen if Charles died without an heir. Which very obviously he does have.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah IF CHARLES BECOMES KING - THEN YES WILLIAM WOULD BE NEXT.

Look I'm talking about a hypothetical scenario that's probably never gonna happen unless the Queen outlives Charles - but if the Queen is still the Queen if Charles does die before being crowned, then it would be one of her other children next in line for the throne, not her grandchild.

[(Anonymous)]

You can repeat this all you like, but you're wrong.

[(Anonymous)]

hey quick question have you ever read a book on English/British history in your life

like ever

[(Anonymous)]

nayrt but LOL. I know that not everyone is into royal history, but it seems super weird to me that anyone could be so insistent that they understand how the line of succession works and yet... completely wrong? Wars have been fought over this stuff.

[(Anonymous)]

The current line of succession is quite clearly defined, so unless you think Andrew or someone else is going to start a war of succession in the rather unlikely event of Charles' dying before the Queen (though who knows maybe Lizzie is actually immortal) there's no question about who's next in line.

[(Anonymous)]

Perhaps you're thinking of the Saud'i Arabian laws of succession?

The British laws of succession are not the same, and have been established far longer. Eldest son's eldest son, basically. That's how we got Richard II, not John of Gaunt. Richard was only deposed because he was a total shit.

[(Anonymous)]

Anon...shut up and read a book. That's not how it works, the line of succession doesn't change if the current monarch dies.

[(Anonymous)]

Please stop talking about things you know nothing about. You look like an idiot.

[(Anonymous)]

I do genuinely wonder how many Americans are replying to this and if anyone actually from the UK is replying to this.

[(Anonymous)]

Hi, American with an MA in British history here. I've literally never heard anyone if any nationality come out with the insane concept that That Anon is spouting and I'm completely baffled as to where they even got that idea

[(Anonymous)]

Why would that matter? The facts are the same no matter who's speaking them.

[(Anonymous)]

Agreed with the anon above me that it doesn't really matter because facts are facts, but I am from the UK and can confirm that anon is an idiot. William is an heir; Anne, Edward and Andrew are all spares and will not take the throne unless a lot of other people kick the bucket.