what would happen if a bomb fell on Buckingham Palace in 1916, killing King George V, Queen Mary, The Prince of Wales, Prince Albert, Princess Mary, Prince Henry, and Prince George, leaving Prince John as King John II, who is the Regent for this 10 year old sickly king? will he be seen in Public or be hidden away as he was when just a Prince? how will the public deal with the Death of George V? and the death another king in 3 years?
WWI bombing kills the Royal Family
- Thread starter black angel
- Start date
I'd say the German pilot who did that is going to get his arse handed to him when he returns. The Kaiser will not be pleased at this.
Also, the new king will be John III.
Anyway, this will raise support for the war against the murderous Hun in the British Empire, and possibly stifle independence sentiment in British countries as the loyalists now have a martyr King to rally around.
Also, the new king will be John III.
Anyway, this will raise support for the war against the murderous Hun in the British Empire, and possibly stifle independence sentiment in British countries as the loyalists now have a martyr King to rally around.
Well that might have only happened on a holiday like Christmas cause most of the time David and Bertie would have been serving in the Army and Navy respectively the rest of the time.
but, for fun sake
King John II (I can't find but 1 King John in England and 1 King John of Scotland so....) would have most likely had his Aunt, Princess Royal Louise, Duchess of Fife as his Regent.
When he dies a few years later (assuming childless) she would succeed her nephew as sovereign, probably as Queen Victoria II (Louise Victoria Alexandra Dagmar).
Queen Victoria II
When she dies in 1931 her older daughter, Princess Alexandra, 2nd Duchess of Fife, will probably become Queen Victoria III (Alexandra Victoria Alberta Edwina Louise)
Queen Victoria III
When she dies in 1959, her son, Alastair Windsor, 2nd Duke of Connaught and Strathearn, will probably become King Arthur I (Alastair Arthur)
King Arthur I
Now here's where things get "interesting". Alistair Windsor died on "active duty" during WWII, in OTTAWA CANADA!
"He fell out of a window when drunk and perished of hypothermia overnight."
One of course would have to assume Alistair, Prince of Wales would NOT have been in a postion to fall out a window in Canada like Alistair, Duke of Connaught and Strathearn was in our timeline. One would have to assume he would have married, produced children, reigned and died later in this ATL. So today either his child or grandchild would be sovereign.
but for fun
Let's say Alistair, PoW still dies in 1943. Well the throne would pass to Queen Victoria III's nephew.
So here's your current King of England:
James George Alexander BannermanCarnegie, 3rd Duke of Fife
King James III (or George VI)
Last edited:
who the hell is King John II?
Sorry, I got the James kings confused in my mind as Johns.
Anyway, the best opportunity for this is really 1917. German bomber aeroplanes struck London at night sometimes in that year, and the inaccuracy could work in favor of this scenario. It got the Germans to blow up a nursery IOTL, so accidentally hitting Buckingham Palace at night is not unthinkable.
The Dude
Banned
Buckingham Palace isn't exactly difficult to notice. Its a much larger target than any nursery.
Well, then say they're flying over on a foggy night. The pilot decides they've a better chance of getting back without hauling the dead weight of bombs, and just drops them over London. At that point, Buckingham Palace, being bigger, stands a greater chance of being hit.
The Kaiser's reaction can be interesting. This would be killing his blood relatives, and either he or the German high command gave explicit orders to keep casualties due to bombing to a minimum (to the point of bombing government buildings on sundays).
And the idea of Germany rebuilding its air forces after WWI is going to be a lot more frightening after the war.
a few nit-picks, first I don't think a female would be made John's Regent, I'm unsure how much the public knew of John's Illness but they surely didn't (and wouldn't) know he was dying, so having his heir as Regent is unlikely, for Regent if I was to guess, Prince Arthur, Duke of Connaught and Strathearn, a military man who just finished up as Governor General of Canada
Second I agree that the Princess Louise would pick Victoria II in this time of national morning and struggle, but I think her daughter would pick Queen Alexandra (her Grandmother's name, Queen Alexandra was very popular and is still loved) and Alistair would be King Alistair, Arthur is too big a name to fill, plus two heirs to the crown named Arthur have died so the name has bad jew-jew in royal circles, plus he'd out rank his own late grandfather, The Prince Arthur, Duke of Connaught and Strathearn, and there is the whole "Is he Arthur I or Arthur II?" and lastly monarchs have only changed their names when their first name is wholly unsuited, and in 1916 to date only one monarch (King Edward VII) had ever done in, in OTL only two ever have (Edward VII & George VI)
The Dude
Banned
......
So he just drops them over a heavy populated area without regard for, say, anything? A much better option than depositing them over, say, a place where they are sure there are few civilians.
And even then, the chances of that bomb going through the clouds in just the right place to kill the Royal Family is definitely, 100% ASB.
Here was the last Regency Act before WWI:
Regency Act 1910
By 1910, Queen Victoria's grandson, King George V was monarch. However, his children were all under the age of 18. Therefore Parliament passed a new Regency Act (10 Edw. VII & 1. Geo. V c. 26) in 1910, that named the King's consort, Queen Mary as regent. No regency council was provided for, as in the previous Regency Act of 1840.
Here's the PERMANENT Regency Act enacted a few years later:
Regency Act 1937
By 1937, King George V's second son, George VI, was King, and his eldest daughter, The Princess Elizabeth, was the heiress presumptive. However, Princess Elizabeth was under the age of 18, leading to the need for a new Regency Act.
Rather than pass a specific Regency Act relating to the death or incapacity of George VI only, Parliament passed the Regency Act 1937 (1 Edw. VIII & 1 Geo. VI c. 1), which provided for the incapacity or minority of all future monarchs. It also repealed the Lords Justices Act 1837, and provided a new office, Counsellor of State, to be appointed during the monarch's absence abroad, or temporary illness.
The Act required that the regent should be the next person in the line of succession who was:
- over the age of 21,
- a British subject domiciled in the United Kingdom, and
- capable of succeeding to the Crown under the terms of the Act of Settlement 1701.
- the consort of the monarch and
- the next four people in the line of succession over the age of 21.
on the Regency, of Course a Queen would be Regent, and for the 1937 bill the Person they're talking about is King George VI's Brother Prince Henry, I still say Prince Arthur gets it, maybe Queen Alexandria
David S Poepoe
Banned
You forgot Queen Victoria (the Great), who was born Alexandrina Victoria. Prince Arthur would just be known as 'the Prince Regent' as when the future George IV filled for George III. King Arthur, I think Alastair just might no cut it, will be without any enumeration until a second Arthur appears.
Didn't one of the above mentioned minor royals become King (briefly) in EdT's Fight and Be Right? He was named Alexander IV if I remember rightly.
There's also the point worth making that no UK monarch will take the regnal name John, even if born John, it's inauspicious.
His other names were Charles and Francis nether very good so might as well cut the loses and go with John
Any reason he would have to use one of his actual names? I'm no expert on the matter, but couldn't he just go with something standard like being another George?