Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

dickthegrouch

(4,507 posts)

14. Only because Edward VIII had no children.

Reply to Angleae (Reply #10)

Fri Feb 20, 2026, 07:55 PM

Feb 20

And because Male lineage took precedence over any female lineage at that time.

If Edward VIII had any children the eldest male would have been the first in line.

Abdication or death would have made no difference.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

21 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Government considers removing Andrew from royal line of succession [View all] Wicked Blue Feb 20 OP

I thought the Andrew formerly known as Prince... cab67 Feb 20 #1

Andrew was effectively stripped of his place in line the instant Charles became King. dickthegrouch Feb 20 #4

Not true and it's happened befroe. Angleae Feb 20 #10

Only because Edward VIII had no children. dickthegrouch Feb 20 #14

He is still 8th in line Wicked Blue Feb 20 #13

on nose. Javaman Feb 20 #2

It would never happen anyway FakeNoose Feb 20 #3

I tend to agree, but I think it may be more symbolic than anything else. hamsterjill Feb 20 #5

Agreed FakeNoose Feb 20 #15

Point Taken. hamsterjill Feb 20 #16

Different man? If that is the deciding factor he would still be immoral!! Real decency does not depend on personal gain Stargazer99 Feb 21 #17

The Andrew "demotion" is NOT about the throne --- it's about the mugshot. QueerDuck Feb 20 #6

Only now? Miguelito Loveless Feb 20 #7

These things must be done delicately... QueerDuck Feb 20 #11

It takes legislation to do it, and consultation with all Commonwealth members that share their Head of State muriel_volestrangler Feb 20 #12

The royals belong in a zoo installation at the British Museum. PufPuf23 Feb 20 #8

BBC this morning said the last Royal to be arrested was Charles I in 1646. Talitha Feb 20 #9

At least the UK, and many other countries, are ahead of the US in recognizing depravity and dealing with it. Aussie105 Feb 21 #18

Meanwhile here in the US it's basically crickets fujiyamasan Feb 22 #20

Royalty, man, what a scam. NT A-Schwarzenegger Feb 21 #19

The Royals Are Just a Living Tourist Trap, So it Makes Sense DrFunkenstein Feb 22 #21