# Elizabeth II surpassing Victoria **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [September 1, 2015, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-ii-surpassing-victoria/729620 "2015-09-01T17:04:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2015, 8:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-ii-surpassing-victoria/729620/61 "2015-09-02T08:30:41Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > Has Elizabeth addressed the issue in that fashion? What if she’s alive but incapable of fulfilling her duties; would she abdicate out of duty to the nation (a matter I hear she takes quite seriously)? Or, since the queen’s duties seem almost purely ceremonial, would her diminished capacities not really have a negative effect? It’s already fairly common to have other members of the royal family perform ceremonial but non-critical parts of her duties (like showing up at the 200th Anniversary of the founding of some town, etc.). More important ones tend to get a royal who is in line for the throne – Charles or William. It’s the ones that have a legal, governmental function – like the State Opening of Parliament of Trooping of the Colors – that she always attends in person. Though even then heirs like Charles & William are usually also present.\* \*Somewhat different from here in the US, where efforts are made to NOT have the President & Vice President together too often. For example, they never fly on the same plane. And at the Annual State of the Union speech of the President to a joint session of Congress (where the VP presides over 1 house), there is always one cabinet member from the line of succession who is not present at the time, in case somebody blows up the whole building. ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2015, 8:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-ii-surpassing-victoria/729620/62 "2015-09-02T08:41:52Z")
> [@t-bonham@scc.net](#): > > It’s already fairly common to have other members of the royal family perform ceremonial but non-critical parts of her duties (like showing up at the 200th Anniversary of the founding of some town, etc.). More important ones tend to get a royal who is in line for the throne – Charles or William. It’s the ones that have a legal, governmental function – like the State Opening of Parliament of Trooping of the Colors – that she always attends in person. Though even then heirs like Charles & William are usually also present.\* Interesting, and thanks for the information. While it sounds like the monarch’s presence at certain functions is required, it also sounds entirely ceremonial. Does she have any actual authority, any duties which might be diminished if she were to begin to lose her faculties; or could they just wheel her to the State Opening of Parliament and as long as she’s got a pulse it’s cool? ---
**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:** [September 2, 2015, 8:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-ii-surpassing-victoria/729620/63 "2015-09-02T08:47:02Z")
She doesn’t have to attend the opening of parliament. If she’s not available a commission can be appointed to do it for her. (This is how parliament is prorogued. Rather than having a State Closing of Parliament she just signs a paper letting a group of politicians read “her” (the government’s) prorogation speech for her.) Queen Victoria often did not open parliament personally, especially when she was in a protracted session of mourning. ---
**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:** [September 2, 2015, 8:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-ii-surpassing-victoria/729620/64 "2015-09-02T08:49:45Z")
As mentioned above, Parliament would appoint a Regent. ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2015, 8:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-ii-surpassing-victoria/729620/65 "2015-09-02T08:53:42Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > Does she have any actual authority, any duties which might be diminished if she were to begin to lose her faculties; or could they just wheel her to the State Opening of Parliament and as long as she’s got a pulse it’s cool? She reads a speech at the Opening (though it’s mostly written by the leaders of Parliament). But I don’t think that’s legally required; she just has to summon the Parliament. I suppose they could just announce that she happens to have a bad cold/laryngitis and so have someone else read it for her – Charles might be a good choice – get the country used to him. ---
**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:** [September 2, 2015, 8:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-ii-surpassing-victoria/729620/66 "2015-09-02T08:53:58Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > As mentioned above, Parliament would appoint a Regent. Parliament’s direct involvement isn’t necessary any more. Since 1937 there have been standing arrangements for how and when to have a regency. Three people off of a list of a few (some judges, the Speaker, the Lord Chancellor, and the monarch’s spouse IIRC) swear that she’s incompetent and the next in line to the throne who is of age becomes regent. ---
**Author:** ![usedtobe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ec9cab/32.png) [@usedtobe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/usedtobe)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2015, 9:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-ii-surpassing-victoria/729620/67 "2015-09-02T09:31:21Z")
Is there an active and obvious movement to by-pass Charles entirely and give the job to William when the time comes? I saw a bit of speculation that Princess Diana had said something about ‘expecting that Charles would never become King’ or some such thing. Any real chance that some method would be found to overlook him, or, alternately, for Charles to immediately abdicate and pass the throne on to William? ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2015, 10:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-ii-surpassing-victoria/729620/68 "2015-09-02T10:03:22Z")
> [@Sangahyando](#): > > … At that, Edward had to wait only until he was 59 to become king; Charles is 66. Given the difference in healthy longevity between the two eras, Charles probably has a longer potential reign were ERII to go soon than Edward did at his coronation. To be sure, either could under- or over-perform the expected longevity. Though nobody knew it at his coronation, Edward was only going to make it another 9 years as King. Given our knowledge of how long Edward did last, for now Charles is the odds-on favorite for the longer reign. But let ERII live another 10 years and the betting would definitely be shifting towards Edward. ---
**Author:** ![Beware\_of\_Doug](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/278dde/32.png) [@Beware\_of\_Doug](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beware_of_Doug)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2015, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-ii-surpassing-victoria/729620/69 "2015-09-02T13:34:31Z")
> [@gnoitall](#): > > Well, if we’re trying to rescue the monogram for an Edward, the next King Edward would be the 9th, (IX), so… maybe pencil in a slash mark across the second “I” in “II”? Kinda becomes an X that way. 😕 Moot point anyway, as I seem to recall Charles was leaning towards George VII, after his grandfather. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2015, 1:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-ii-surpassing-victoria/729620/70 "2015-09-02T13:44:14Z")
> [@t-bonham@scc.net](#): > > It’s already fairly common to have other members of the royal family perform ceremonial but non-critical parts of her duties (like showing up at the 200th Anniversary of the founding of some town, etc.). Coincidentally, just yesterday by 9-year-old daughter asked me just what it is the job of queens and princesses was now that they didn’t really rule the country. It was an interesting discussion, but the upshot of it was that being a member of the royal family really isn’t a great job. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2015, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-ii-surpassing-victoria/729620/71 "2015-09-02T13:48:56Z")
> [@usedtobe](#): > > Is there an active and obvious movement to by-pass Charles entirely and give the job to William when the time comes? Legally speaking this would be only slightly less difficult than the UK ceding London to East Timor. The line of succession is really, really, really entrenched in law. People float this idea because, frankly, Charles is kind of a doofus. But there have been doofuses before. Edward VIII was a Super Doofus and even his own family thought he would make a terrible King and wished Albert (George VI) had been born first, but they made him King, however briefly. Unless he predeceases his mother, Charles becoming King is a safe a bet as the sun rising in the East. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2015, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-ii-surpassing-victoria/729620/72 "2015-09-02T14:46:00Z")
> [@usedtobe](#): > > Is there an active and obvious movement to by-pass Charles entirely and give the job to William when the time comes? … > … > Any real chance that some method would be found to overlook him, or, alternately, for Charles to immediately abdicate and pass the throne on to William? > [@RickJay](#): > > Legally speaking this would be only slightly less difficult than the UK ceding London to East Timor. The line of succession is really, really, really entrenched in law. … Not at all my area, but … It does seem that bypassing Charles over his objections, no matter how gently stated, would be out there between constitutionally unthinkable and politically impossible. But I wonder what \*\*RickJay \*\*and the others think of the idea of Charles either promptly abdicating, or simply saying, “No, I decline the honor. Follow the existing rules of succession after me.” With the understanding / assumption that this is Charles’ own initiative, not the result of backroom arm-twisting by others, royal or otherwise. The abdication of Edward VIII was quite a hullabaloo at the time. I wasn’t there, but reading seems to indicate most of the crisis was about the dilemma posed by his impending marriage to Simpson. Once abdication was the settled solution, the mechanics of implementing it were pretty straightforward. I suspect that with that precedent, the somewhat more relaxed attitude to the royals these days, and a less tumultuous overall world situation vs. 1936, such a move by Charles would be accommodated with very little trouble. The media circus would be a sight to behold, but the politics & legalities are pretty straightforward. Obviously the fact that many of ERII’s worldwide subjects are less than thrilled with Charles today certainly would help the medicine go down. ---
**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:** [September 2, 2015, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-ii-surpassing-victoria/729620/73 "2015-09-02T14:58:35Z")
But why would Charles do that? This is the job he’s trained for since he’s been born. Why would he voluntarily give it up? ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2015, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-ii-surpassing-victoria/729620/74 "2015-09-02T15:01:59Z")
> [@Martian Bigfoot](#): > > Just twenty more years or so, Lizzie. Hang in there! We’re rooting for you. Given her mother’s longevity, it’s entirely possible. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2015, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-ii-surpassing-victoria/729620/75 "2015-09-02T15:16:48Z")
> [@Honey](#): > > The queen takes her responsibility very seriously, and thinks it’s her God-given duty. There is no chance that she would ever abdicate. Not even if she thought she was no longer able to do that duty? That’s why I don’t accept that explanation. You just don’t do it in the UK. If you are infirm, you will have your successor fill your duties, but you do not abdicate. It seems to be more about looks and ceremony. Well, that and the legal messiness of abdication. ---
**Author:** ![Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/earl_snake-hips_tucker/32/3269_2.png) [@Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Earl_Snake-Hips_Tucker)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2015, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-ii-surpassing-victoria/729620/76 "2015-09-02T15:33:37Z")
I used a days between dates calculator and got September 10 as the date on which she surpasses Victoria. On September 9 she equals her reign. ---
**Author:** ![RobDog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f07891/32.png) [@RobDog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RobDog)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2015, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-ii-surpassing-victoria/729620/77 "2015-09-02T15:41:57Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Not even if she thought she was no longer able to do that duty? > > That’s why I don’t accept that explanation. You just don’t do it in the UK. If you are infirm, you will have your successor fill your duties, but you do not abdicate. > > It seems to be more about looks and ceremony. Well, that and the legal messiness of abdication. My understanding is that if she is unable to perform any of her duties then a Regent (Charles) will be installed according to the current Regency Acts. The Queen has then effectively declared herself _unable_ to abdicate, as she has now been removed from the position of being able to make that level of decision. This means that the only way Charles could become King is either by the death of the Queen, or a forced abdication which Charles would have to be party to, which, I imagine, would be extremely unlikely, inadvisable and unpopular. I’m sure a constitutional expert will be along shortly to correct me! ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Dr.Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Drake)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2015, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-ii-surpassing-victoria/729620/78 "2015-09-02T15:53:12Z")
> [@Aspidistra](#): > > I believe there aren’t _now_, but not for the reason you think. Shillings were still circulating for decades after decimalization - they were worth 5p and were the same size as a 5p piece so you didn’t get confused. When the size of the money was changed in 1990, they went. Technically, it was the penny that got re-valued, not the shilling. The shilling was still [sup]1[/sup]/[sub]20[/sub] of a pound. It’s just that a pound was now 100 pennies (“new pence”), not 240, and thus a shilling was 5 new pence, no longer 12 old pence. ---
**Author:** ![SaharaTea](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@SaharaTea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SaharaTea)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2015, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-ii-surpassing-victoria/729620/79 "2015-09-02T15:57:14Z")
> [@Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](#): > > I used a days between dates calculator and got September 10 as the date on which she surpasses Victoria. On September 9 she equals her reign. Someone posted [this](http://www.academia.edu/3662753/When_will_Queen_Elizabeth_II_have_reigned_for_longer_than_Queen_Victoria) in another thread. Buckingham Palace has determined she’ll surpass Victoria sometime during the evening of Sept. 9. They took leap years and each hour of succession into account. ---
**Author:** ![Springtime\_for\_Spacers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Springtime\_for\_Spacers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Springtime_for_Spacers)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2015, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-ii-surpassing-victoria/729620/80 "2015-09-02T16:07:34Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > But why would Charles do that? This is the job he’s trained for since he’s been born. Why would he voluntarily give it up? And why would he do that to William! Coming to the throne young, with a young family isn’t a great thing. Right now he has an actual job and some chance of enjoying a normal family life, all out the window once he’s king. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-ii-surpassing-victoria/729620.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-ii-surpassing-victoria/729620.md?page=5)