It's now back in Scotland where it belongs.
There are many websites with histories of the Stone of Scone, which is much more tangled then this article makes out. Here's one:
http://www.tartans.com/articles/stoneofscone.html
Also note that the current occupant of the English throne is a woman, as have been several of her predecessors.
...for God promised through Jeremiah (33: 17) that "David shall never lack a man to sit upon the throne of the House of Israel."
However, a Middle Eastern or Meditteranean racial element in the British Isles and extensive pre-Roman conntact between the two regions do not prove that the "Stone of Destiny" had anything to do with King David. Nor does it prove that the Celtic and Germanic peoples that have inhabited the British Isles for 1,500 to 2,500 years have substantial genetic or other ties to Israel or other parts of the Middle East. Most DNA measurements of the English people indicate that they are very genetically similar to the current inhabitants of northwest Germany, the Netherlands, and Denmark, the areas from which the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes migrated from in the 5th and 6th Centuries AD. There are also considerable genetic similarities between the English and the three Celtic nations that occupy the remainder of the British Isles. There are also similarities to the Norwegians, the Belgians, and the northern French. On the other hand, there are far greater genetic differences between the English and either the Jews (whether Ashkenazic or Sephardic) or other Middle Eastern peoples. There are, OTOH, strong genetic similarities between the Jews and the Palestinians, Syrians, and the northern Iraqis, notably Kurds and Assyrians, as strong as those among the northwest Europeans. In other words, DNA measurement comport with mainstream history and not Anglo-Israelite theories. The linguistic patterns also support the mainstream histoic theory of strong ties among most European nations and considerable differences between them and the inhabitants of the Middle East, ancient or modern.
Anglo-Israelism, that is, the theory that the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel somehow became the Germanic and Celtic peoples of northwest Europe, is of relatively recent origin, no older than the 18th Century. There is no Biblical support for this theory. Rather, mainstream Christian theology holds that the European peoples are decended from Japheth, while the Semitic peoples are descended from Shem. Indeed, even the "Ten Lost Tribes" theory is really but a figment. The Babylonian captivity broke up the tribal governments of the Israel of the judges and kings. However, there is evidence in the Epistles of Paul that people who were members of the ten tribes still identified with those tribes in the 1st Century AD. Although medieval kings and nobility attempted to embellish their heritage by claiming ties to King David (an ancestor of Jesus Christ), there is no more evidence for this than for the assertions of the Roman or Aztec emperors or Greek kings that they were descended from gods.
The weight of the evidence is on the side of the mainstream historians and theologians in this matter.
One of my posessions from my father is a book about the Arbroath Abbey (1178 AD)in Arboath Scotland. (He was born there) Much of the Declaration of Arbroath,(1320 AD) BTW, the basis for the US Declaration of Independance)
In 1957 the Stone was stolen (returned if your'e a Scot) from England to Scotland and missing for a number of months. I remember people asking my father where he thought the Stone might be. He responded each time he did not think he knew, He knew where it was. (But would not say)It was buried where it belonged; in the East end of the Abbey where the alter once was. And that's where they ultimately found it. Had the Brits known thier history they would have started looking there.
In this book, is a picture of the ruins of the Abbey; one of which shows the 'East end'. Handwritten near the pic is a note by the Administrator of the time (1960) noting with an X the exact location where it was eventually found, and the date. Not the date found, the date "received".
Of course, knowing untimately the Stone would be returned - you don't think the Scots would be dumb enough to let the real Stone be found and taken back. Many believe the Stome of Destinay never left Scotland from the 1957 date on. What WAS returned (legend has it) was a replica stone carved from one serving as a cover of a cesspool. The Scots in the know took great joy in knowing future coranations took place with Bristish royalty using the eqaivelent of a toilet seat, in their ceremony.