# Could there be a Queen Meghan? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [May 23, 2018, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-there-be-a-queen-meghan/814691 "2018-05-23T18:17:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2018, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-there-be-a-queen-meghan/814691/141 "2018-05-31T04:53:36Z")
> [@UDS](#): > > …He can take any name he likes, more or less, not only because under English law anyone can, but also because as the sovereign he would be “the **found** of all honours”… It’s “fount”: [Fount of honour - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fount_of_honour) > [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > If that’s the case, Hoover was not eligible to be elected President in 1928. He was living in London from 1915 to 1917, running the Belgian Food Relief Commission, as a private citizen. There actually was some minor controversy about that at the time, but because he’d been doing such important humanitarian work, nobody really made a stink about it. ---
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2018, 11:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-there-be-a-queen-meghan/814691/142 "2018-05-31T11:49:34Z")
> [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](#): > > She was born in the old Russian Empire in 1898, and lived from 1906-1921 in the U.S., it looks like: [Golda Meir - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golda_Meir#Early_life). Don’t know if she was ever naturalized - U.S. immigration law was a bit looser back then. It’s well known that she was naturalized when her father became a US citizen. Couldn’t have Israeli citizenship until 1948. Easy to get Israeli citizenship due to the Law of Return (1950/1952). I just haven’t found a cite online yet saying she gave up US citizenship. Found a reference to an Israeli cabinet minister in 1960 with dual French-Israeli citizenship. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2018, 12:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-there-be-a-queen-meghan/814691/143 "2018-05-31T12:53:48Z")
> [@ftg](#): > > It’s well known that she was naturalized when her father became a US citizen. Couldn’t have Israeli citizenship until 1948. Easy to get Israeli citizenship due to the Law of Return (1950/1952). I just haven’t found a cite online yet saying she gave up US citizenship. Found a reference to an Israeli cabinet minister in 1960 with dual French-Israeli citizenship. Members of Knesset were only forbidden from holding dual citizenship in 1996 (Basic Law: The Knesset, Section 16a). Until then, plenty of MK were also foreign citizens. I don’t know about Golda. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2018, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-there-be-a-queen-meghan/814691/144 "2018-05-31T15:24:56Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > However, Scottish monarchical precedents don’t seem to carry much weight with the British Royal Family, vide the numbering system for monarchs. I believe that’s not correct. I can’t quickly find a cite but I have read that future monarchs will use the greater regnal number. So should Charles choose Robert as a regnal name, he would be Robert IV. [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regnal_number) has this to say: > [@](#): > > After the realms were united with the Acts of Union 1707, separate numbers were not needed for the next five monarchs: Anne and the four Georges. However, when William IV acceded in 1830, he was not called William III in Scotland.[citation needed] (George Croly pointed out in 1830 the new king was William I, II, III, and IV: of Hanover, Ireland, Scotland, and England respectively.[2]) Nor were Edward VII and Edward VIII known as Edward I and Edward II (or possibly II and III, if one counts the disputed reign of Edward Balliol) of Scotland. These kings all followed the numbering consistent with the English sequence of sovereigns (which, incidentally, was also the higher of the two numbers in all occurring cases). This was not without controversy in Scotland, however; for example, Edward VII’s regnal number was occasionally omitted in Scotland, even by the established Church of Scotland, in deference to protests that the previous Edwards were English kings who had “been excluded from Scotland by battle”.[3] I think many Scots would be enthused by a monarch with a Scottish regnal name, though probably not MacBeth :D. ---
**Author:** ![thelurkinghorror](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7c8e57/32.png) [@thelurkinghorror](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thelurkinghorror)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2018, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-there-be-a-queen-meghan/814691/145 "2018-05-31T15:32:04Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > Members of Knesset were only forbidden from holding dual citizenship in 1996 (Basic Law: The Knesset, Section 16a). Until then, plenty of MK were also foreign citizens. I don’t know about Golda. Interesting. You can be a dual citizen and in legislature or the cabinet, it’s only president or maybe VP too where this would end up being an issue. If in the line of succession and not eligible, you are skipped (Elaine Chao, for example). ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2018, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-there-be-a-queen-meghan/814691/146 "2018-05-31T17:13:34Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > I believe that’s not correct. I can’t quickly find a cite but I have read that future monarchs will use the greater regnal number. So should Charles choose Robert as a regnal name, he would be Robert IV. I agree that’s what’s been proposed by some, starting with Churchill, who was PM when HM ascended the throne and the issue of her number was raised by Scots nationalists. But my point is that that proposal tends to favour English numbering, because they tend to use the names of English monarchs. Unless they start branching out and using names of former Scottish monarchs, the numbering will be de facto based on English numbering. > [@](#): > > I think many Scots would be enthused by a monarch with a Scottish regnal name, though probably not MacBeth :D. Long live King Dub, second of that name! 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2018, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-there-be-a-queen-meghan/814691/147 "2018-05-31T17:28:52Z")
> [@UDS](#): > > Well, Harry was royal (i.e. a member of the royal family) but not noble (a member of the nobility) before he married. Now he is both, since he has a title of nobility - namely, Duke of Suffolk. > > Just to add; British nobility is narrowly circumscribed. Until Lady Diana Spencer married the Prince of Wales, she was a commoner. She was the daughter of an earl but, while an earl is not a commoner, his children have only courtesy titles, and they are commoners. Well, this can be confusing. So, there are only a handful of Peers. If you aint a Royal or a Peer then you are a “commoner” (i.e. you can sit in the Commons), even if you have a title. So, yes, they are nobles or gentility, but not a “Peer”. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2018, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-there-be-a-queen-meghan/814691/148 "2018-05-31T17:39:34Z")
> [@eburacum45](#): > > One of the least known kings of England was Louis VIII of France > [Louis VIII of France - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_VIII_of_France) > who was declared king on 2 June 1216 after a partially successful invasion, but was never crowned. Eventually they paid him 10,000 crowns to go away and pretend it never happened. Well, they dont consider him to have even been the King. They also dont consider Lady Jane Grey to ever have been Queen, even tho she was officially proclaimed Queen. The do consider Edward V to have been King, even tho he never was crowned, never reigned and was declared bastard by Parliament- but this is due to Tudor propaganda. Oddly they list Harold II, even tho William’s claim was that Harold wasnt rightful King he was. The 'official list" has several issues. I dont know what the kerfuffle is about Charles being named GVII or not, anyone want to fill me in? (Not on the fact that he said he wasnt, but why it is such a big deal being G7) ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2018, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-there-be-a-queen-meghan/814691/149 "2018-05-31T17:47:28Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > …I dont know what the kerfuffle is about Charles being named GVII or not, anyone want to fill me in? (Not on the fact that he said he wasnt, but why it is such a big deal being G7) As noted above, some people think the regnal name Charles III would be unfortunate, due, I guess, to Charles I having been deposed and beheaded, and Charles II being a rake. Taking the name George VII would be a nice way for the current Prince of Wales to honor his grandfather, but rumors that he has already decided to take the name have been circulating for awhile now but officially denied. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2018, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-there-be-a-queen-meghan/814691/150 "2018-05-31T18:11:58Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Well, this can be confusing. So, there are only a handful of Peers. If you aint a Royal or a Peer then you are a “commoner” (i.e. you can sit in the Commons), even if you have a title. So, yes, they are nobles or gentility, but not a “Peer”. No, in the British system only peers are nobility. ---
**Author:** ![dtilque](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d6d6ee/32.png) [@dtilque](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dtilque)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2018, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-there-be-a-queen-meghan/814691/151 "2018-05-31T21:34:04Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > But my point is that that proposal tends to favour English numbering, because they tend to use the names of English monarchs. Unless they start branching out and using names of former Scottish monarchs, the numbering will be de facto based on English numbering. We’ll know if there’s ever another King James. Will he be James III or James VIII? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2018, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-there-be-a-queen-meghan/814691/152 "2018-05-31T21:48:19Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > No, in the British system only peers are nobility. But no longer are all Peers members of the House of Peers. ---
**Author:** ![Baron\_Greenback](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/baron_greenback/32/48_2.png) [@Baron\_Greenback](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baron_Greenback)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2018, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-there-be-a-queen-meghan/814691/153 "2018-05-31T22:05:21Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > But no longer are all Peers members of the House of Peers. It’s the House of Lords, but it’s a bit more subtle than that. All members of the House of Lords are peers of the realm. The number of hereditary peers in the Lords is restricted currently to 92 in number - 90 of whom are actually elected, in some fashion - but the rest of the hereditary peers who don’t sit in the Lords remain as peers of the realm. The large majority of the House of Lords consists of people who have been made non-inheritable Life Peers. All of them are initially eligible to sit in the Lords, but it is now possible to retire, or to be kicked out for eg non-attendance. The Life Peers who don’t take their seat in the Lords are still peers of the realm though. (NB I gave up on getting the capitalisation consistent here) ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Feldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lord_feldon/32/341_2.png) [@Lord\_Feldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Feldon)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2018, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-there-be-a-queen-meghan/814691/154 "2018-05-31T23:26:48Z")
> [@Baron\_Greenback](#): > > All members of the House of Lords are peers of the realm. [The bishops aren’t:](https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/house-of-lords-publications/rules-and-guides-for-business/the-standing-orders-of-the-house-of-lords-relating-to-public-business/) > [@](#): > > Bishops to whom a writ of summons has been issued are not Peers but are Lords of Parliament ---
**Author:** ![Lamoral](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lamoral/32/16078_2.png) [@Lamoral](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamoral)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2018, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-there-be-a-queen-meghan/814691/155 "2018-05-31T23:51:21Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > I dont know what the kerfuffle is about Charles being named GVII or not, anyone want to fill me in? (Not on the fact that he said he wasnt, but why it is such a big deal being G7) Because it fucks up the chord progression. ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2018, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-there-be-a-queen-meghan/814691/156 "2018-06-01T01:07:16Z")
I’d go with Alphonso, just to mix things up. [One was on track to reach the throne already](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alphonso,_Earl_of_Chester), so it’s not like there is no precedent. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2018, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-there-be-a-queen-meghan/814691/157 "2018-07-11T14:04:43Z")
A minor misstep: the Duchess of Sussex expressed an opinion on an Irish political question: [MSN](http://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/royals/meghan-markle-might-have-broken-royal-protocol-by-speaking-out-in-favor-of-legalizing-abortion-in-ireland/ar-AAzUXUc?ocid=ientp) ---
**Author:** ![PatrickLondon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/patricklondon/32/4422_2.png) [@PatrickLondon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatrickLondon)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2018, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-there-be-a-queen-meghan/814691/158 "2018-07-11T14:14:11Z")
Oops. And, to boot, an opinion on the politics of another country, not just on an awkward issue in the UK (since the primary opposition to reform in Northern Ireland comes from the party the UK government depends on for its survival). Moral: be very careful what you say to people you cannot absolutely rely on for discretion (especially if you aren’t in a position to have any influence over them). ---
**Author:** ![PatrickLondon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/patricklondon/32/4422_2.png) [@PatrickLondon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatrickLondon)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2018, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-there-be-a-queen-meghan/814691/159 "2018-07-11T14:16:23Z")
PS: Interesting (and heartening) that the first overseas trip arranged for them as a couple is to Ireland, rather than (as might once have been the case) France or one of the Scandinavian countries the royals are related to. How times have changed. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-there-be-a-queen-meghan/814691.md?page=7)