Where They A Usurper?: A New Series

Tags

Hereditary Succession, King Edward IV, King Henry IV, King Henry VII, King John, King Richard III, King Stephen of England, King William III, Lady Jane Grey, The Witan, The Witenagemot, Usurper, William the Conqueror

One aspect of the British Monarchy is hereditary succession. However, that is not the only rule governing the succession to the crown. There are laws controlling who can legally inherit the throne.

I often will see people claim that some descendant of either a King of England or a scion of the royal family is the rightful monarch of England or the United Kingdom due to hereditary succession. These claims mistakenly believe that hereditary descent is the main issue controlling the succession to the crown.

His Majesty, the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

In the beginning of the monarchy, in the times of the Anglo-Saxon period prior to the Norman Conquest, the throne was elective. Succession was governed by the Witan.

The Witan (lit. ’wise men’) was the king’s council in Anglo-Saxon England from before the seventh century until the 11th century. It was composed of the leading magnates, both ecclesiastic and secular, and meetings of the council were sometimes called the Witenagemot.

Its primary function was to advise the king on subjects such as promulgation of laws, judicial judgments, approval of charters transferring land, settlement of disputes, election of archbishops and bishops and other matters of major national importance. The witan also had to elect and approve the appointment of a new king. Its membership was composed of the most important noblemen, including ealdormen, thegns, and senior clergy.

After the Witan was abolished by William the Conqueror succession was at first in the hands of the sovereign but eventually evolved into hereditary succession. Even when the succession became hereditary laws governing the succession also evolved.

Crown of St Edward

This leads me to the next series I will examine. Where they a usurper? There were monarchs of England that may not have actually held the throne legally and were therefore usurpers to the crown.

Below are listed 9 people that claimed the throne and I will examine whether or not they were legally on the throne or were they a usurper?

William I the Conqueror, King of the English and Duke of Normandy

Stephen, King of the English, Count of Blois

John, King of England and Lord of Ireland

Henry IV, King of England and Lord of Ireland

Edward IV, King of England and Lord of Ireland

Richard III, King of England and Lord of Ireland

Henry VII, King of England and Lord of Ireland

Lady Jane Grey

William III, King of England, Scotland and Ireland

Legal Succession: The House of Stuart, Part VI

Tags

Act of Settlement, Electress of Hanover, English Civil War, King William III, The Bill of Rights

At the time of the succession of William III and Mary II Parliament passed the Bill of Rights that limited the power of the monarch/crown and officially barred Catholics from sitting on the throne. This ended over a century of religious battles over the throne. The Bill of Rights of 1689 established the powers of the Crown as well as its limit. “it hath been found by experience that it is inconsistent with the safety and welfare of this Protestant kingdom to be governed by a papist prince“; It was also established that William III and Mary II were named as the legal successors of James II-VII and it established the succession based on that fact. The throne would pass to the issue of William III and Mary II, then to her sister, Princess Anne of Denmark and her heirs and then finally, to any heirs of William III by a later marriage. The monarch was further required to swear a coronation oath to maintain the Protestant religion.

The Bill of Rights completed a process that had begun with the English Civil War of the 1640s which was a conflict over who would hold power, the Crown or Parliament. With the Bill of Rights it showed that Parliament held the majority of the power. The Crown still held some power and it would take many more years until it just became a ceremonial position. But that is the topic for another series. The major point in the theme of this series is that the monarch no longer controlled the legal succession to the crown and that power was now invested in Parliament.

Within 12 years Parliament would have to act once more to regulate and control the legal succession to the crown. In 1694 Queen Mary II died of smallpox at the age of 32. She did not have any issue. According to the Bill of Rights the next in line was her sister, Princess Anne, married to Prince George of Denmark. The pregnancies of Princess Anne is very sad. She had up to 18 miscarriages and of the births that lived only Prince William, Duke of Gloucester at the age of 11 caused a crisis in the succession. It would seem that Princess Anne would not have any more children, King William III was still unmarried after the death of Queen Mary II and this left the Catholic Prince of Wales, James Francis as the only hier to the throne. Since Catholics were barred from the throne by the Bill of Rights this made the Prince of Wales unacceptable.

To answer this problem Parliament issued the Act of Settlement which settled the throne of England and Scotland on a cousin of King James II-VII, Sophia, Electress of Hanover the closest Protestant relative, and her Protestant heirs. The Act bypassed not only the Prince of Wales and his future descendants but also the descendants of Princess Henriette-Anne, daughter of King Charles I of England and Scotland.

Anne succeeded King William III in 1702, and reigned until her death on 1 August 1714. Sophia of Hanover predeceased her by a few weeks, and so Sophia’s son, Georg-Ludwig, ascended the throne as the first British monarch of the House of Hanover. Although according to Parliament George I of Hanover was the legal successor to Queen Anne, there were supporters of the Prince of Wales, called Jacobites, who would not be silenced.