By marrying a woman, who was not of nobility, should not the prince lose his right to the throne? And, since he did not lose it, why?!
Because the English monarcy has different rules to that of the former Tsars of Russia (who iirc did have such a rule). It all begain in 1215 with the signing of the magna carta, which was a document which restricted the powers of a monarch. Other things which also had an influence around the time of Charles II and James II, I can't remember what its called, but was reguarding things like who a royal could marry, and what powers a king would have if he happened to be a foreigner (which was lucky because of George the first being german). William isn't the first to marry a commoner
Wait, but did not current queen's predecessor resign because he wanted to marry a "common" woman? (Also, I do not think we could say Russian Tsars had any rules at all. After all, Peter the Great was married to a "commoner" and she was a co-ruler with him and an Empress after him.)
Ah, I see. Does not make any sense though, for a head of the church is able to change the church's policy, otherwise he is not the head of the church. After all, that's how Henry VIII became the head of the church, because of marital policy issues, right?
yeah, that and casting off the papest yoke anyway if blizzard or wizards of the coast can change the rules every few years I don't see why the developers of other fictitious franchises can't do it as well
hey prince, your balls dropped. let me pick them up - not in front of the kids - darling you cant avoid seeing something by closing your ears
He asked for a little head and the flower girl said, "he's not getting mine!" One of life's great ironies is the recent bru-ha-ha-ha about Charles marrying Camilla. Thats what being King of England is all about! Yup, same reason the German princes went for Luther - serious political and economic advantages to not have to pay homage to Rome.
