# Queen Regent or Queen Consort? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [February 6, 2022, 4:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-regent-or-queen-consort/958992 "2022-02-06T04:44:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![GreenWyvern](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/greenwyvern/32/2834_2.png) [@GreenWyvern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreenWyvern)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2022, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-regent-or-queen-consort/958992/21 "2022-02-06T12:35:00Z")
🙄   ---
**Author:** ![Schnitte](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/schnitte/32/9033_2.png) [@Schnitte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Schnitte)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2022, 12:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-regent-or-queen-consort/958992/22 "2022-02-06T12:44:52Z")
Even though this was a joke, it does point to something relevant. In pre-modern ages, when political power was based on the personal standing of rulers and the feudal loyalties owed to them by their subjects, inter-marriage between dynasties was often intentionally pursued to consolidate power. But with the shift towards the modern nation-state, the idea began to gain hold that this state is distinct from the person of the ruler, and that foreign thrones held by the same ruler did not quite fit into the system. Take, for instance, the personal union between Britain and Hanover that existed between 1714 and 1837. Obiously, Britain was by far the more important throne than Hanover, so that’s where the kings resided, and they were hardly familiar with their German subjects. Hanover law made it clear that the government and administration of this kingdom had to be well separated from those of the UK, and run by Hanover citizens. Despite the personal union between the crowns, the two states were constitutionally and administratively very distinct. Nowadays I would doubt that even a personal union of this sort would be tolerated. (The personal union between the UK and the other Commonwealth realms is, of course, not an issue - this one is intended.) By the way, the reason why this personal union ended was another quirk in the rules of succession, which differed between the two kingdoms: Hanover did not allow women in the line of succession, so Victoria could succeed to the British throne in 1837 but left the Hanover throne to her uncle. ---
**Author:** ![kenobi\_65](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kenobi_65/32/13178_2.png) [@kenobi\_65](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kenobi_65)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2022, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-regent-or-queen-consort/958992/23 "2022-02-06T16:04:25Z")
> [@Schnitte](#): > > This is a nitpick, and I suppose you mean the right thing, but the reason why Elizabeth became queen regnant was not simply that she was the eldest child of George VI; it was, importantly, that she didn’t have brothers. Even a younger brother would have outranked her in the line of succession. Thank you for the clarification! It sounds like it was the case then, but if the same situation were to happen today, and she had a younger brother, she still would have become queen regnant. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2022, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-regent-or-queen-consort/958992/24 "2022-02-06T16:11:50Z")
Was it necessary for the queen to make this statement? Won’t Camilla be queen consort automatically? ---
**Author:** ![DPRK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4491bb/32.png) [@DPRK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DPRK)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2022, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-regent-or-queen-consort/958992/25 "2022-02-06T16:16:05Z")
> [@Schnitte](#): > > Despite the personal union between the crowns, the two states were constitutionally and administratively very distinct. Nowadays I would doubt that even a personal union of this sort would be tolerated. (The personal union between the UK and the other Commonwealth realms is, of course, not an issue - this one is intended.) On the contrary, why would anyone care about a “personal union”? Excepting, of course, republicans. For example, Elizabeth is the head of state of the Isle of Man because she happens to be the lord or duke or whatever you want to call it, but that does not make it part of the United Kingdom or the British Commonwealth. ---
**Author:** ![DPRK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4491bb/32.png) [@DPRK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DPRK)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2022, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-regent-or-queen-consort/958992/26 "2022-02-06T16:22:07Z")
> [@Dewey\_Finn](#): > > Was it necessary for the queen to make this statement? Won’t Camilla be queen consort automatically? That is ultimately up to the king, isn’t it? As far as giving out titles. ---
**Author:** ![kenobi\_65](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kenobi_65/32/13178_2.png) [@kenobi\_65](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kenobi_65)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2022, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-regent-or-queen-consort/958992/27 "2022-02-06T16:24:33Z")
> [@Dewey\_Finn](#): > > Was it necessary for the queen to make this statement? Won’t Camilla be queen consort automatically? Yes, because there had long been speculation that, due to negative public perception about Camilla, she would have taken the title “Princess Consort” instead. As described in this BBC article: > [@](#): > > On the eve of her Jubilee, the Queen directly addressed the unresolved question of Camilla’s future title. > > “Queen Consort” refers to the spouse of a ruling king and would mean “Queen Camilla” as her future title. > > There had been suggestions Camilla would be known as Princess Consort. > > A Clarence House spokesman said the Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall were “touched and honoured”. > > There has been a different practice for male consorts of a monarch, such as Prince Philip or Queen Victoria’s husband, Prince Albert, who have become Prince Consort rather than King. > > The usual precedent would have been for Camilla to automatically become Queen when Charles was King, but because of uncertainty about public opinion it had been suggested that might not be the case. > **[Queen backs Camilla to be Queen Consort on Jubilee](https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-60274816)** > > Marking 70 years as monarch, the Queen says Camilla should have the title when Charles becomes King. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2022, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-regent-or-queen-consort/958992/28 "2022-02-06T16:27:36Z")
Why does Elizabeth get to decide this? If she dies and Charles becomes King, don’t his wishes prevail? ---
**Author:** ![GreenWyvern](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/greenwyvern/32/2834_2.png) [@GreenWyvern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreenWyvern)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2022, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-regent-or-queen-consort/958992/29 "2022-02-06T16:34:04Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > Why does Elizabeth get to decide this? If she dies and Charles becomes King, don’t his wishes prevail?   Sure, but it makes a big difference as far as public opinion is concerned to know that the Queen has endorsed it. ---
**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:** [February 6, 2022, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-regent-or-queen-consort/958992/30 "2022-02-06T16:37:56Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > Why does Elizabeth get to decide this? Because she’s the monarch at the moment, and > [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > If she dies and Charles becomes King, don’t his wishes prevail? Yes, but if it comes with his Mama’s authority now, it’s likely to avert any possible PR problem when the time actually comes. ---
**Author:** ![Schnitte](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/schnitte/32/9033_2.png) [@Schnitte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Schnitte)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2022, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-regent-or-queen-consort/958992/31 "2022-02-06T16:54:00Z")
Legally the Isle of Man is not part of the UK (same for the Channel Islands), but for practical purposes it is. Most importantly, the Isle of Man does not have its own foreign and defence, or monetary, policy - the UK handles those matters on behalf of the Isle of Man. So from the perspective of other countries it is, for practical purposes (though not legally) part of the UK with internal autonomy. The situation would be very different if the British monarch, or the spouse of the British monarch, held the throne of a truly independent foreign country. That would, in the present situation, not be advisable, and I am certain that to prevent this, the person in question would be urged to renounce all claims to the foreign throne. The exception to this are the Commonwealth realms, which are intended to be joined with the British crown in a personal union (a perfectly common term, by the way - no need to degrade it with quotation marks). Hence the coordination of the 2013 amendment to the law of succession among all the realms. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2022, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-regent-or-queen-consort/958992/32 "2022-02-06T17:11:15Z")
OK, I was just wondering if any historical or legal reasons were involved as well. ---
**Author:** ![Fiendish\_Astronaut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiendish_astronaut/32/3295_2.png) [@Fiendish\_Astronaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiendish_Astronaut)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2022, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-regent-or-queen-consort/958992/33 "2022-02-06T17:25:14Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > Why does Elizabeth get to decide this? If she dies and Charles becomes King, don’t his wishes prevail? She doesn’t. Camilla would become Queen Consort by law. The government are the only people who can change that. Hence QEII said it was “her sincere wish”. But nobody is going to argue with the Queen. ---
**Author:** ![dtilque](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d6d6ee/32.png) [@dtilque](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dtilque)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2022, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-regent-or-queen-consort/958992/34 "2022-02-06T18:48:51Z")
Camilla could just claim to be a [hurricane](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Camille) ---
**Author:** ![Elmer\_J.Fudd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/elmer_j.fudd/32/1211_2.png) [@Elmer\_J.Fudd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elmer_J.Fudd)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2022, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-regent-or-queen-consort/958992/35 "2022-02-06T18:50:30Z")
I like the French system; they all get the title “citizen” before their heads drop into the basket. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2022, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-regent-or-queen-consort/958992/36 "2022-02-06T18:50:53Z")
A republic, in other words. ---
**Author:** ![Senegoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senegoid/32/6606_2.png) [@Senegoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Senegoid)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2022, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-regent-or-queen-consort/958992/37 "2022-02-06T23:20:07Z")
> [@kenobi\_65](#): > > Thank you for the clarification! It sounds like it was the case then, but if the same situation were to happen today, and she had a younger brother, she still would have become queen regnant. Doesn’t the new law specify that it does not apply to royal heirs that are already born? Thus, even if Charles had an older sister, Charles would still be first in line. And even if William had an older sister, William would be next in line after Charles. Is that correct? IIUC, the law first applies to William’s son George – who, being the oldest and a son, isn’t affected anyway. The first time the law may actually affect the royal succession is not yet on the horizon. ---
**Author:** ![Cazzle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cazzle/32/75_2.png) [@Cazzle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cazzle)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2022, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-regent-or-queen-consort/958992/38 "2022-02-07T01:24:20Z")
It’s all just theatre. Charles wanted to marry Camilla and there was a lot of ill will at the time. People hated the idea of Queen Camilla, so the royal family invented a fiction that she’d be “Princess Consort” to reduce the grumbling. Now years have passed and there are very few people left with strong feelings against her, the Queen has made a statement about wanting her to be Queen Consort to help smooth the way. It was always going to end with Camilla as Queen Consort, but the royal family managed to buy themselves 20 years. ---
**Author:** ![Senegoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senegoid/32/6606_2.png) [@Senegoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Senegoid)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2022, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-regent-or-queen-consort/958992/39 "2022-02-07T01:27:14Z")
> [@Cazzle](#): > > It was always going to end with Camilla as Queen Consort, but the royal family managed to buy themselves 20 years. Liz just might outlive Charles anyway. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2022, 1:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-regent-or-queen-consort/958992/40 "2022-02-07T01:41:18Z")
And may I say that HerMa was clever in picking her accession jubilee day, after the year she lost _her_ consort, to make this announcement. _Thank you for your appreciation, can we all finally bloody move on about this?_ > [@Senegoid](#): > > Doesn’t the new law specify that it does not apply to royal heirs that are already born? Yes, as I understand it, it was set so as to not disturb any already existing line of succession. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-regent-or-queen-consort/958992.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/queen-regent-or-queen-consort/958992.md?page=3)