Posted by Laura Wallace on November 18, 1997 at 15:52:29:
In response to Elizabeth I, written by Kathleen Ann on November 18, 1997 at 15:21:35
I believe that the line of succession of the children from Henry VIII's children was as follows:
Henry VIII had no surviving brothers, but even if he had this would not have changed the way the crown descended to Elizabeth.
After Elizabeth I (the last of Henry VIII's descendants) died, the crown was inherited by the grandson of Henry's eldest sister, Margaret. If Henry VIII had had any surviving brothers, the crown would have gone to their heirs first.
To tie this back to entails, in general, crowns, peerages, and property descend to the eldest son, and then to his eldest son. When there is no male heir, you trace back one generation and find the eldest male descendant of the eldest male descendant of the man who first held the title/property/crown. It of course gets considerably more complicated than this.
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.