>King Charles II had far more than ten. A significant proportion of
>the English House of Lords used to be titles created by him for his
>illegitimate offspring in addition to his five or six legitimate
>children.
Charles II had no legitimate children. The history of the British Isles would be a lot different if he had.
>The Heortling model is roughly based on the Celtic/Viking/Anglo-Saxon
>model. That developed into the medieval European system by placing
>greater importance on legitimate heirs - i.e. church approval of the
>parents.
I really don't see the development. Hereditary succession and elective leadership has been kicking back and forth across Europe down through the centuries. In particular the Holy Roman Empire and the Polish Crown were elective.
Even if the Prince had to be a blood descendent of Sartar, the Sartarite practice would have been to chose the most competent candidate rather than the one with the best claim.
--Peter Metcalfe
Powered by hypermail