# When Charles is crowned king of Great Britain... **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [March 30, 2014, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-charles-is-crowned-king-of-great-britain/684904 "2014-03-30T16:07:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![UDS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecae2f/32.png) [@UDS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UDS)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2014, 3:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-charles-is-crowned-king-of-great-britain/684904/21 "2014-03-31T03:14:54Z")
> [@Senegoid](#): > > It has been common throughout European history for the royalty of various nations to intermarry. Why did Philip have to renounce his Greek and Danish titles when he married into the Windsor family? There’s a historic fear in England about a Queen regnant who marries a foreign prince becoming subject to all kinds of pernicious foreign influences because Wives, Be Subject To Your Husbands, and all that. There was probably still some residue of that as late as 1947, so the renunciation of foreign titles may have been a nod in that direction. True, previous consorts of Queen regnants did not renounce foreign titles (Prince George of Denmark, married to Queen Anne; Prince Albert of Saxe Coburg and Gotha, married to Queen Victoria). But Phillip was in many respects thoroughly British; his mother was British, he had lived in Britain from boyhood and had been educated there, he had made a career in the British navy. English was his primary language; he could speak very little Greek, and no Danish at all. For such a man to be seen to be “clinging to” foreign titles might seem odd. So he gave them up, along with converting to Anglicanism and being naturalised as a British subject, all part of a project to emphasis his Britishness. ---
**Author:** ![RivkahChaya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rivkahchaya/32/8919_2.png) [@RivkahChaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RivkahChaya)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2014, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-charles-is-crowned-king-of-great-britain/684904/22 "2014-03-31T03:31:34Z")
> [@ctnguy](#): > > This seems very unlikely. The only way to make that happen (other than Elizabeth outliving Charles) would require acts of Parliament in all 18 (is it still 18?) realms. They’re having enough trouble getting the laws passed to remove the preference for male heirs. > > As to the OP question, as I understand it the wife of the King is by law automatically the Queen Consort. Whether she will actually use that title is another matter. I think there’s some problem with the fact that she’s a divorcee. A divorcee isn’t supposed to be allowed to be queen, which is why Edward VIII had to abdicate, but in the case of the Duchess of Cornwall, Charles already has heirs, and there was no question that the divorcee would not be the mother of more heirs. I have no idea how far back the rule goes, since Henry II was married to a divorcee, but she came with the Aquitaine, which I’m sure helped, and with Mrs. Simpson, the real problem may have been that she was an American, but that wasn’t technically not allowed. Do queens consort typically have coronations? I suspect the Duchess of Cornwell will not, whatever the usual custom. ---
**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:** [March 31, 2014, 3:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-charles-is-crowned-king-of-great-britain/684904/23 "2014-03-31T03:48:42Z")
> [@RivkahChaya](#): > > Do queens consort typically have coronations? They’re usually crowned in the same service as their husbands. Anne Boleyn had her own elaborate coronation, but her successor wives did not. George IV had his wife barred from his coronation, and she tried unsuccessfully to crash the ceremony. ---
**Author:** ![panache45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/panache45/32/64_2.png) [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2014, 6:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-charles-is-crowned-king-of-great-britain/684904/24 "2014-03-31T06:19:45Z")
> [@thelurkinghorror](#): > > I think they can do this if they invoke the 1926 Act of Elizabeth Will Live for Fuckingever. She only has to live another one year, 5 months and 9 days, when her reign surpasses that of Victoria. After that, she can die or abdicate any time she pleases, and will literally be history. ---
**Author:** ![psychonaut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/psychonaut/32/4655_2.png) [@psychonaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psychonaut)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2014, 7:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-charles-is-crowned-king-of-great-britain/684904/25 "2014-03-31T07:06:14Z")
> [@Baron\_Greenback](#): > > The UK. The results of an incredibly unscientific experiment of searching [news.google.co.uk](http://news.google.co.uk) today shows 2000 hits for “Duke of Edinburgh” but only 1500 hits for “Prince Philip”. Tentatively, then, I might be right about the former being the more common name, though not by too much. ---
**Author:** ![Malden\_Capell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/malden_capell/32/5274_2.png) [@Malden\_Capell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malden_Capell)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2014, 8:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-charles-is-crowned-king-of-great-britain/684904/26 "2014-03-31T08:45:51Z")
This is anecdotal of course, but I’ve heard it said plenty of times ‘Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh’. ‘Prince Philip’ is a common moniker for His Royal Highness and if you said it everybody would know who you meant. ---
**Author:** ![SciFiSam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/47e85d/32.png) [@SciFiSam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SciFiSam)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2014, 9:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-charles-is-crowned-king-of-great-britain/684904/27 "2014-03-31T09:57:48Z")
One of the conditions for allowing Charles to marry Camilla was that she would never be Queen. The Wiki cite above is as good as any. > [@psychonaut](#): > > The results of an incredibly unscientific experiment of searching [news.google.co.uk](http://news.google.co.uk) today shows 2000 hits for “Duke of Edinburgh” but only 1500 hits for “Prince Philip”. Tentatively, then, I might be right about the former being the more common name, though not by too much. Prince Phillip is definitely the name he’s most commonly known by, even though newspapers often use his more formal title. They also more often refer to The Duke of Cambridge since William got that title, but in common parlance he is definitely more known as Prince William. ---
**Author:** ![APB](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8e8cbc/32.png) [@APB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/APB)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2014, 12:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-charles-is-crowned-king-of-great-britain/684904/28 "2014-03-31T12:32:57Z")
> [@Baker](#): > > …will Camilla, his wife and Duchess of Cornwall, be entitled queen consort? Will she wear a crown at the ceremony? The official line is still that she will be ‘HRH The Princess Consort’, in accordance with [what was said in 2005 at the time of their engagement](http://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/media/press-releases/announcement-of-the-marriage-of-hrh-the-prince-of-wales-and-mrs-camilla-parker). Stories that she will be called Queen after all or that she definitely doesn’t want to be Queen crop up in the British press from time to time, but there’s no reason to think that those aren’t just unsubstantiated speculation. The general assumption is that if she’s not using the title of Queen, she will not be crowned. But there is no reason why the tradition can’t be reinvented. Except that it would seem a bit daft to do so, if a point is being made that she isn’t the Queen. It’s not as if not crowning her would create any obvious practical problems. Not every Queen Consort has been crowned and there is no reason why she still couldn’t attend her husband’s coronation. In 1953 there was an issue about Philip’s role in the ceremony, as, apart from the homage, there was nothing for him to do. So he took communion with his wife and he was mentioned in one of the prayers. One could imagine the same sort of minor adjustments being made for a Princess Consort. Actually, the biggest practical difference would be that traditionally peeresses only get invited if a Queen is being crowned. But then the question as to who will get invited is an open one anyway. And, of course, it’s quite possible that there will be radical changes to the whole ceremony, irrespective of Camilla’s position. [QUOTE=RivkahChaya] If Prince Philip outlives Elizabeth II, what will Philip be called after Charles is crowned? not “Prince Father,” surely? But since he was never king, can “King Father” be right? Will he just remain “Prince Philip”? “Prince Dowager”? [/QUOTE] His titles would be unchanged. The only difference to his position would be that he and Charles will swap places in the men’s order of precedence. And that’s one respect in which a potential problem created by having a Princess Consort will be avoided. If Charles’s parents had instead been King Philip and his consort, Queen Elizabeth, and Elizabeth outlived Philip, there would be a problem. That’s because a Queen Dowager usually ranks below the wife of the current King. Which is fine if they are both Queens. But should a Princess Consort outrank a Queen Dowager? ---
**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:** [March 31, 2014, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-charles-is-crowned-king-of-great-britain/684904/29 "2014-03-31T13:55:58Z")
> [@RivkahChaya](#): > > I have no idea how far back the rule goes, since Henry II was married to a divorcee. . . . As were all but one of Henry VIII’s wives (substituting divorcé for divorcée), but there’s probably a double standard at play. I’m not sure if it’s men vs. women or on the throne vs. off. ---
**Author:** ![Billdo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/billdo/32/315_2.png) [@Billdo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Billdo)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2014, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-charles-is-crowned-king-of-great-britain/684904/30 "2014-03-31T19:32:31Z")
Isn’t the real answer to this question: Whatever the heck Charles thinks should be done at his coronation after he becomes King. When Chuck married Camilla, there was still some significant remaining Diana-mania, which, I think, has pretty much entirely abated (in favor of Kate-mania, I suppose). At this point, I don’t think anyone sees Camilla as some massive threat to the monarchy or desecrator of the legacy of Holy Diana. With each passing year (and it looks like there’s no reason Elizabeth won’t continue to reign for many years to come) whatever remaining feeling that Camilla is less than legitimate will continue to dwindle. By the time Charles picks up the Crown, I doubt that anyone much will care (except for the few people that decide they are outraged to get themselves on TV), and he can do what he wants. ---
**Author:** ![SciFiSam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/47e85d/32.png) [@SciFiSam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SciFiSam)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2014, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-charles-is-crowned-king-of-great-britain/684904/31 "2014-03-31T20:58:06Z")
> [@Billdo](#): > > Isn’t the real answer to this question: Whatever the heck Charles thinks should be done at his coronation after he becomes King. Nah, it’s all decided by parliament - he doesn’t get to just say what he wants. ---
**Author:** ![alphaboi867](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alphaboi867/32/3898_2.png) [@alphaboi867](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alphaboi867)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2014, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-charles-is-crowned-king-of-great-britain/684904/32 "2014-04-01T00:11:48Z")
> [@Lord\_Feldon](#): > > …Anne Boleyn had her own elaborate coronation, but her successor wives did not. George IV had his wife barred from his coronation, and she tried unsuccessfully to crash the ceremony. That was all he could do, despite being barred from the coronation Caroline of Brunswick became queen the moment her husband ascended the throne (just like Camilla will). His attempt at divorcing her failed spectacularly. > [@panache45](#): > > She only has to live another one year, 5 months and 9 days, when her reign surpasses that of Victoria. After that, she can die or abdicate any time she pleases, and will literally be history. She will _never_ abdicate under any circumstances. We might see Charles get appointed Prince Regent (like when George III went insane) if she was a stoke or dementia sets in, but not an abdication. > [@SciFiSam](#): > > One of the conditions for allowing Charles to marry Camilla was that she would never be Queen. The Wiki cite above is as good as any. > … Nothing is in writing. Just like she’s legally the Princess of Wales despite not using the title when Charles becomes King she will be Queen barring an act of parliament. > [@Dr.Drake](#): > > As were all but one of Henry VIII’s wives (substituting divorcé for divorcée), but there’s probably a double standard at play. I’m not sure if it’s men vs. women or on the throne vs. off. Technically those were annulments (on increasing tenuous grounds) and not divorces in the modern sense. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2014, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-charles-is-crowned-king-of-great-britain/684904/33 "2014-04-01T00:45:35Z")
It would be most appropriate for Charles to become known as [King Woo The First](http://edzardernst.com/2013/11/a-tribute-to-prince-charles-champion-of-anti-science-on-his-65th-birthday/). ---
**Author:** ![UDS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecae2f/32.png) [@UDS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UDS)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2014, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-charles-is-crowned-king-of-great-britain/684904/34 "2014-04-01T00:58:25Z")
> [@Dr.Drake](#): > > As were all but one of Henry VIII’s wives (substituting divorcé for divorcée . . . Nitpick: Nope. When Henry VIII married his third wife, Jane Seymour, his first two wives were dead, so he was a widower, not a divorcé. Same goes for when he married Anne of Cleves, his fourth wife. However when he married his fifth and sixth wives, Anne of Cleves was still living. ---
**Author:** ![thelurkinghorror](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7c8e57/32.png) [@thelurkinghorror](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thelurkinghorror)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2014, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-charles-is-crowned-king-of-great-britain/684904/35 "2014-04-01T01:23:49Z")
> [@alphaboi867](#): > > She will _never_ abdicate under any circumstances. We might see Charles get appointed Prince Regent (like when George III went insane) if she was a stoke or dementia sets in, but not an abdication. What about if the Spanish invade? Abdications are a “regular” thing in Benelux when they get to a certain age. But the Monarchs of the UK, Scandinavia, the Papacy (well until recently), it’s just not done. Excluding unusual events. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-charles-is-crowned-king-of-great-britain/684904.md?page=1)