How do you suddenly 'forget' a 772-year-old coronation tradition?
Why do the official stories of Queen Victoria's 1838 coronation read like a comedy of errors? We have bishops putting rings on the wrong fingers, they prematurely ended proceedings and had to re-continue, and only two people total (Victoria and a sub-dean), actually knew the supposed procedure. This is certainly not the standard we would expect in a 'modern' coronation.
Is it possible that it wasn't just a matter of 'bishops getting complacent' but rather, there had been a serious break in the (supposedly 772-year) chain of tradition, due to event(s) that the powers who like to be, don't want us knowing about?
If we are in Satan's little season (or coming out of some other similar reset), when exactly did this transition occur, and how much can we believe about the history we are told occurred prior?
Note that I'm citing (and connecting dots) between historical claims made by official sources here – not because I believe them entirely, but because if what they are saying already contradicts the mainstream narrative, perhaps these are rocks worth turning over.
Also, I get the feeling while reading these House of Commons briefings — and following the footnote trails — that they are revealing things we are 'meant' to see. Why are they doing this, when it would seem to be no particular benefit or advantage to them doing so? Spiritual rules of engagement perhaps.
Again, this is evolving research so I'm not claiming I have clean answers to provide, but I feel like there is something here, and I am curious what you guys might be able to contribute to this line of inquiry.
Alex
Some other recent UK Royal videos:
Alex
Alex
Alex
No spam, no sharing to third party. Only you and me.
Member discussion