Just Labradors banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,287 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
And I'll probably kick myself for asking what should probably be obvious to me.

First of all...... I had NO IDEA that the Queen of England was married! I was just looking at pictures from the gala at the White House. She's with Prince Phillip, her husband. I HAD NO IDEA!!!! :eek:

Anyway, why is he never seen with her? I see her on the news, but never with him.

AND, if she is married, why is he a Prince and not King? It says he's the Duke of Edinberg. He can be a Duke AND Prince?

I'm confused. HELP!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,802 Posts
*shrug* The whole thing is a mystery to me. I can't even figure out why the Royals are such a big deal here in the US.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,075 Posts
Oh Colin......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,788 Posts
Because you can only be King if you are born into the royal family. Since he married in, he can't be more than a Prince.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,287 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Aim said:
Because you can only be King if you are born into the royal family. Since he married in, he can't be more than a Prince.
Ok, so there will never be a King and Queen, married couple, at the same time?

How come we never seen Phillip?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,206 Posts
So Diane would always have been Princess right?

(funny this topic should come up today... I started watching The Queen last night)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,170 Posts
As a prince, he is her inferior in the heirarchy. You don't notice him with her because he is always a few steps behind her. In public processions and functions, they never walk side by side.

Momma to J and A said:
*shrug* The whole thing is a mystery to me. I can't even figure out why the Royals are such a big deal here in the US.
Because they are no longer yours. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,788 Posts
blacklabelias said:
Aim said:
Because you can only be King if you are born into the royal family. Since he married in, he can't be more than a Prince.
Ok, so there will never be a King and Queen, married couple, at the same time?

How come we never seen Phillip?
Well here in Canada, we see them both. We're still part of the Commonwealth (right Canucks?? LOL)

As for never seeing a King and Queen, I'm not sure. I don't know all the ins and outs of it that well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,114 Posts
He's actually with her quite a lot. Usually walking three steps behind like a good husband should.

Married with four kids. She's 80 so she's probably been married close to 60 years. That's where Princes Charles, Andrew and Edward and Princess Anne came from.

He's not the King since the royal line runs through her side of the family. He just married in.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,170 Posts
Aim said:
blacklabelias said:
Aim said:
Because you can only be King if you are born into the royal family. Since he married in, he can't be more than a Prince.
Ok, so there will never be a King and Queen, married couple, at the same time?

How come we never seen Phillip?
Well here in Canada, we see them both. We're still part of the Commonwealth (right Canucks?? LOL)

As for never seeing a King and Queen, I'm not sure. I don't know all the ins and outs of it that well.
They often have duties apart from one another, but are very frequently in public together. As I said above, the Americans probably don't realise Philip is there because he is a few steps behind his wife, as dictated by protocal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
680 Posts
Actually there have been very few queen regnants in Great Britain in history. The most famous is Elizabeth I, who was never married, and her sister, Queen Mary I ("Bloody Mary). Bloody Mary was married to the King of Spain, so titles really didn't matter here. The next queen regnant was Mary of William and Mary fame. William and Mary were offered the crown at the Restoration. She was the actual heiress who was married to William, elected king of Holland, and the offer was for them as a pair of reigning monarchs. When William and Mary both died, Mary's sister Anne became queen. She was married to Prince George of Denmark, so this is really the first time that the reigning queen's husband is styled a prince. Queen Victoria followed this pattern with her husband, Prince Albert. This Queen Elizabeth also followed that pattern when her husband was styled Prince Phillip. All those princes could have been crowned King Consort, but I understand that many thought that would have been "demeaning" to the man. Also, it is assumed that the title "king" would outrank a "queen," and any reigning queen worth her salt would not want to be outranked!!!

Probably more than what you wanted to know.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,129 Posts
kpowell said:
Actually there have been very few queen regnants in Great Britain in history. The most famous is Elizabeth I, who was never married, and her sister, Queen Mary I ("Bloody Mary). Bloody Mary was married to the King of Spain, so titles really didn't matter here. The next queen regnant was Mary of William and Mary fame. William and Mary were offered the crown at the Restoration. She was the actual heiress who was married to William, elected king of Holland, and the offer was for them as a pair of reigning monarchs. When William and Mary both died, Mary's sister Anne became queen. She was married to Prince George of Denmark, so this is really the first time that the reigning queen's husband is styled a prince. Queen Victoria followed this pattern with her husband, Prince Albert. This Queen Elizabeth also followed that pattern when her husband was styled Prince Phillip. All those princes could have been crowned King Consort, but I understand that many thought that would have been "demeaning" to the man. Also, it is assumed that the title "king" would outrank a "queen," and any reigning queen worth her salt would not want to be outranked!!!

Probably more than what you wanted to know.
This is what I thought, too. If the female inherits the title in her own right, why make the husband King and higher than herself? Makes sense to me. Philip could have been king, but it's no longer tradition to do so.

Was anything ever decided about Charles becoming King, since he divorced and re-married?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,170 Posts
Allie said:
kpowell said:
Actually there have been very few queen regnants in Great Britain in history. The most famous is Elizabeth I, who was never married, and her sister, Queen Mary I ("Bloody Mary). Bloody Mary was married to the King of Spain, so titles really didn't matter here. The next queen regnant was Mary of William and Mary fame. William and Mary were offered the crown at the Restoration. She was the actual heiress who was married to William, elected king of Holland, and the offer was for them as a pair of reigning monarchs. When William and Mary both died, Mary's sister Anne became queen. She was married to Prince George of Denmark, so this is really the first time that the reigning queen's husband is styled a prince. Queen Victoria followed this pattern with her husband, Prince Albert. This Queen Elizabeth also followed that pattern when her husband was styled Prince Phillip. All those princes could have been crowned King Consort, but I understand that many thought that would have been "demeaning" to the man. Also, it is assumed that the title "king" would outrank a "queen," and any reigning queen worth her salt would not want to be outranked!!!

Probably more than what you wanted to know.
This is what I thought, too. If the female inherits the title in her own right, why make the husband King and higher than herself? Makes sense to me. Philip could have been king, but it's no longer tradition to do so.

Was anything ever decided about Charles becoming King, since he divorced and re-married?
It's up to the Church of England. Since Elizabeth 2 is the head of the Church, I suppose it's up to her.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top