Jacob Stuart Harrison Storytelling Thread - FSTDT Forums Ex-Pet Lolcow

  • Thread starter Thread starter MW 590
  • Start date Start date
I don't think that Edward the Confessor was intending for Edgar Aetheling to be his successor. William the Conqueror had a right to the throne because Edward the Confessor previously promised him the throne and Harold Godwinson swore a sacred oath on holy relics that he would support William's succession to the throne.
Edward the Confessor needs to confess that he fucked up.
 
On the contrary, conquest is the foremost and supreme claim to the throne that superceeds all others. If kings are appointed by God, and rise or fall by his hand then one can only take and hold the throne by the grace of God no?

At least, this is how legitimacy for the throne is or was previously drawn in European states, and remains so in England. It would rather shake things up were it not because like you allude to yourself; Edgar despite William and Harold's claims would be the true successor.

And William/Harold/Harald are not even the earliest example of authority drawn from upsurping a previous royal house.

You can't really claim Catholic sanction to deny it either, since the Papacy recognises this type of authority above bloodlines as well (see the Papal coronation of Napoleon and the wider House of Bonaparte).

That is not quite the case. Only legitimate kings are appointed by God, and sometimes they fall because of God not interfering because he acts in mysterious ways. For example in the Wars of the Roses, Edward IV seized the crown of England based on the fact that he considered himself the rightful heir to the throne and the Lancastrian Kings to be usurpers, and the fact that he was able to seize the crown indicated that many people did not believe that the Lancastrian Kings were appointed by god.

And as I said, William had the best claim to the throne because Edward the Confessor explicitly promised him the succession to the throne in around 1051, and Harold Godwinson swore a sacred oath to support his succession.

The Papacy was conquered by the French in 1798 so the Pope did not have a choice and was forced to crown Napoleon. The other European powers considered him to be a usurper.

Edward the Confessor needs to confess that he fucked up.
But what he did was beneficial to England in the long run. It led to the Norman Conquest and the Normans helped make England more advanced, and are responsible for Common Law and the Magna Carta.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Divine Right of Kings was supplanted by the Last Argument of Kings (Ultimo Ratio Regum) i.e. the advent of the cannon. infantry firearms hadn't even been invented when Louis XIV embossed that on his cannons. Force is a form of power and when fear of the divine stops being an effective force then firepower, force projection, is the closest thing to divine mandate we will ever see again.
 
The Divine Right of Kings was supplanted by the Last Argument of Kings (Ultimo Ratio Regum) i.e. the advent of the cannon. infantry firearms hadn't even been invented when Louis XIV embossed that on his cannons. Force is a form of power and when fear of the divine stops being an effective force then firepower, force projection, is the closest thing to divine mandate we will ever see again.
Wasn't force projection what killed Luke Skywalker?
 
Oh god this whole thread is a glorious dumpster fire.

You aren't the "true king" at all, you're a dumb faggot that, like every moron out in the US and elsewhere claims to be x, y, z because you're being beaten down from making your own cultural identity.

Fuck off trying to steal our shit or claim you're more important than your shift pattern at the 7/11.

Besides, the "real monarch" (who's family sucked so they lost the throne) is some shit in Australia.
 
Hi I am Jacob Harrison. I am a 19 year old sophomore in college. I came here because I was banned from Fundies Say The Darnedest Things, Fstdt Forums, and their subreddit.

A strong start

I have a strong attachment to England. The reasons are because I have English Ancestry, America is culturally an Anglo Saxon nation, and because my dad has a British Sports car(a TR6).

Brilliant follow up

:autism: autism :autism:

wew lads :story:



Serious question: What's your major?
 
That is not quite the case. Only legitimate kings are appointed by God, and sometimes they fall because of God not interfering because he acts in mysterious ways.

I get that you're a troll, but you can do better than this. It must have been God's will that the Catholic Church took such a beating over the next few centuries and then got relegated into irrelevance with the worldwide sex scandals.

For example in the Wars of the Roses, Edward IV seized the crown of England based on the fact that he considered himself the rightful heir to the throne and the Lancastrian Kings to be usurpers and the fact that he was able to seize the crown indicated that many people did not believe that the Lancastrian Kings were appointed by God.

Which shows God doesn't really have a hand in it, and Monarchy rests on that or the claim that might makes right. But even if we do accept the theory that a God is involved and does have chosen favourites if God has chosen favourites, we must accept Elizabeth II is legitimate as she rests unchallenged and undefeated. If might makes right, Elizabeth II remains legitimate too.

And as I said, William had the best claim to the throne because Edward the Confessor explicitly promised him the succession to the throne in around 1051, and Harold Godwinson swore a sacred oath to support his succession.

The Papacy was conquered by the French in 1798 so the Pope did not have a choice and was forced to crown Napoleon. The other European powers considered him to be a usurper.

Now you're in a catch twenty-two. Harold's oath to William was taken under pressure while he was held hostage in Normandy according to you. Therefore Pius VII's oath to Bonaparte while he was held hostage must also be.

Sacramental Christianity (Orthodox and Catholic) does not have the same provisions as the secular legal system in the UK and US on non-royal matters that a promise made under pressure isn't valid. It most certainly is, that's why people are expected to embrace martyrdom rather than lie about their faith.

That said, when it comes to sucession as well as the theological support, oaths made under pressure also remain valid.
 
Last edited:
Let's say you do succeed. What's your fucking end goal? You gonna restore the British Empire? Reconquer the anglosphere? Establish a new Vatican in Toledo Ohio?

Lord_of_Mankind.jpg
 
Back