# Queen of England

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-of-england/215989>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [November 30, 2003, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-of-england/215989 "2003-11-30T00:09:14Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![brianmelendez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/65b543/32.png) [@brianmelendez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brianmelendez)\
**Post date:** [December 4, 2003, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-of-england/215989/21 "2003-12-04T02:33:16Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by Futile Gesture \*  
> \*\*You misunderstand.
> 
> My point was that it was not the monarch of England that became the monarch of Britain, it was the monarch of Scotland. At no point did a monarch only rule England, and then became monarch of Britain. So you could never say that their realm was no longer England alone. It was that King James VI’s realm now included England and no longer being _Scotland_ alone.
> 
> As **Polycarp** accurately described it; I was challenging the inaccurate and Anglocentric point of view. \*\*

Gotcha.

It is interesting, then, that the British monarchs retained the English regnal numbers but dropped the Scottish ones. (Or did they? I have heard the first British monarch, James, referred to as “James VI of Scotland, I of England.” Is the queen regnant ever referred to as “Elizabeth I of Scotland”?)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Dancing\_Fool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/59ef9b/32.png) [@Dancing\_Fool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dancing_Fool)\
**Post date:** [December 4, 2003, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-of-england/215989/22 "2003-12-04T03:25:06Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by brianmelendez \*  
> \*\*It is interesting, then, that the British monarchs retained the English regnal numbers but dropped the Scottish ones. (Or did they? I have heard the first British monarch, James, referred to as “James VI of Scotland, I of England.” Is the queen regnant ever referred to as “Elizabeth I of Scotland”?) \*\*

Yep. I saw that myself while I was in Scotland. I remember it because it made me look up the reason why it was that way.

DancingFool

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![APB](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8e8cbc/32.png) [@APB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/APB)\
**Post date:** [December 4, 2003, 11:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-of-england/215989/23 "2003-12-04T11:18:51Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by brianmelendez \*  
> **It is interesting, then, that the British monarchs retained the English regnal numbers but dropped the Scottish ones.**

True, but only up to a point. Such a fuss was made of the issue in 1952 that Churchill promised that in future the higher regnal number, whether English or Scottish, will be used in Scotland and elsewhere in the UK. The neat thing about this solution was that it meant that the numbers of all the post-1707 monarchs were ‘correct’ after all. It also means that there can still be a Charles III and a William V.

And if we’re being pedantic, James VI and I would have been emphatic that the monarchy became ‘British’ in 1603, whatever his formal title said.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-of-england/215989.md?page=1)