Sorry guys, it's not a LOTR post. I know how much you love those.

No, this is about a very interesting documentary I saw last night called "Britain's Real Monarch". It was based on some recent research that claims that Edward IV, brother of Richard III (or something like that, I'm terrible at English history) was actually illegitimate. Owing to the complex rules of succession that govern the descent of the Crown, this invalidates every single monarch since's claim to sit on the throne. In other words, Elizabeth II has no right to be sitting in Buckingham Palace!

Of course, this whole theory was a bit tenuous, and I don't think it was taking itself too seriously when it declared that Britain's actual King was King Michael I of the house of Hastings, now living in Australia with strong anti-monarchical tendencies. Still, it did raise some interesting questions. Given that the unification of Britain came about under James I, after Richard III, there's a good chance that the Home Nations would still be independent - bad news for the GB Olympic team.

What's more, most of the early C20th rulers of Europe were descendants of Queen Victoria. Is it possible that Kaiser Wilhelm would never have existed? There was probably a connection to the Romanov family, too...if Nicholas II hadn't been ruler of Russia, would the revolutions of 1917 have happened? Would Stalin have ever assumed power?

It's weird how the whole of English history depends on little things like this. And, of course, given England and Britain's historical influence, this has a knock-on effect. Would the real rulers have been quite so fanatical Empire-builders? Would they have angered the American colonies enough to incite the War of Independence?

Playing what-if with history, particularly this far back, can never be anything like exact. Still, it's fun to think of what might have happened, and whether the world would be remotely recognisable today, if only things had happened the other way.

Si-"Wooo...conspiracy theeeorieeees"-gi