English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

14 answers

Yes it's common sense.Eventually they will be king and queen.

2006-11-17 11:00:44 · answer #1 · answered by Roy 1 · 0 2

If a Prince marries a commoner, she is given the title Princess, but that is only by virtue of her marriage to him as hereditary titles are only passed down through the male side of the family.
If a Princess marries a commoner, he is usually created a Lord. This is what happened when Princess Margaret (Queen Elizabeth's younger sister) married a photographer named Snowdon. He became Lord Snowden. Similarily, Princess Anne's husband is not a Prince, because he is not a 'Royal'.
It isn't logical today, but in olden days, when they made up the rules, that's the way the world operated.

2006-11-17 16:57:11 · answer #2 · answered by old lady 7 · 0 0

NO.

Her Royal Highness, The Princess Royal, Princess Anne married her husband and he was known simply as Captain Mark Philips. Her children have NO royal titles. (He was offered a title and turned it down).

If A PRINCESS is to become Queen one day, then yes, he will take on the title of Prince WHEN she becomes Queen, but he will never be King (this would outrank her, see Prince Philip). He would most likely become a Duke, Count, Vicount or Lord until she ascended the throne. This would give him a title, rank and privelege and allow him to marry her as a Royal or Serene Consort. Not every Royal is a HRH (Her Royal Highness) many courts of Europe such as Monaco have the Title of His Serene Highness, Prince Albert of Monaco. Again, if HSH Prince Albert married a Princess destined to become Queen, he would stay a mere Prince Consort.

However, a normal person, marrying a "normal" Princess who will never take the throne will NEVER BECOME A PRINCE.

2006-11-17 12:10:12 · answer #3 · answered by AdamKadmon 7 · 0 0

A man determines his wife's status, unless hers is higher, in which case the status of each is unaffected. This is the case with a Dame, a peeress in her own right, or a princess. Occasionally a man who marries a princess is granted a new title, or a promotion if he already has one (like the Duke of Fife, or the Earls of Athlone or Snowdon who married princesses) but not the title of prince, and it is not automatic. Such a title has to be specially created, whereas a woman obtains a title upon marriage.

It is down to the sexist notion that a man can bestow his status on his wife, but not vice-versa, like a woman takes his surname but he does not take hers.

2006-11-18 06:34:24 · answer #4 · answered by Dunrobin 6 · 0 0

No, in most royal families inheritance is through the male line only. For example, Princess Anne of the United Kingdom has married twice and her husbands have not become princes. The same is true for Princess Caroline and Stephanie of Monaco and their husbands.

2006-11-17 11:09:21 · answer #5 · answered by markclitheroe 2 · 1 0

"It's legal in the UK, right?" No, it's wrong. Same-sex couples are now able to contract a "civil partnership", which has some of the same effects as marriage (e.g. pension rights, joint ownership of homes, inheritance of property, etc.) but in law is explicitly not the same thing as marriage. Thus, if Prince William were to contract a civil partnership with a man, the laws pertaining to royal marriages (e.g. the one about not marrying Roman Catholics) would not apply, and there is no royal rank or title that the partner would automatically be entitled to. A role and title would have to be invented for him, rather as the royal family of Norway have recently had to invent a role for "the illegitimate commoner son of the Crown Princess from before she married the prince", not a role that has a long body of precedent behind it! All that said, I'm not sure that public opinion is ready for a King in a publicly-acknowledged gay relationship, and I suspect that if it were to happen the King in question would simply abdicate rather than put it to the test.

2016-03-28 23:56:05 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Not necessarily, the monarch of the day decides what title will be bestowed. Prince Edward's wife is not a Princess, neither was Fergy and I can't think of any examples of men becoming Princes if they are only married to a Princess. When Philip married Princess Elizabeth he became the Duke of Edinbourgh he only became Prince when she became queen.

2006-11-17 18:46:10 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

I think he becomes a prince consort. This means that while she can be queen, he will still be a prince. Like Queen Elizabeth and Prince Phillip.

2006-11-21 07:33:00 · answer #8 · answered by lucy_diamond66 4 · 0 0

From what I heard, this only works with Duke & Dutchess, Baron & Baroness etc but doesn't go that high up.
Princess Di does have royal blood in her, this was why she was chosen to be the future king's wife. I think the royals are selective in order to avoid common people getting higher title by marriage.

2006-11-17 11:42:42 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

No, he'd just be the consort, but he would not techniquely be a prince.

2006-11-17 14:16:11 · answer #10 · answered by Sarah* 7 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers