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

19 answers

Isn't he Prince of Greece or somewhere and kept the tag just because he couldn't be king of G.B (as he was not born into the British Monarchy)

Having said that, would Diana have been Queen Diana?

Methinks only direct descendants can be crowned king/queen.

2007-09-24 09:07:17 · answer #1 · answered by ~☆ Petit ♥ Chou ☆~ 7 · 4 4

The husband of a Queen is not always called a prince. If he is a king in his own right then he'll continue to be called king.

The current Queen's husband is Prince Philip because he is entitled inhis own right to the title of Prince. This is because he is a prince of the (now passive) Greek royal family. Sometimes he may called the Prince Consort (like Victoria's husband was), but this is not usual these days. His other title is Duke of Edinburgh, which was granted to him when he came to live here.

An 'active' king will always have a queen as a wife but she is not necessarily an 'active' governor, even in absolute monarchies. In other words, it's just a courtesy title. She may still be entitled to a 'real' title of Princess (or Dutchess etc) if she held that before marrying her king.

2007-09-26 05:28:55 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The Queen is technically regarded as a "female king". As the title "King" is regarded as superior to Queen, one may have a King and Queen Consort but not a Queen and King Consort.
Prince Philip was both a Prince before His marriage to Princess Elizabeth and was and still is, in line of the order of succession to the British Throne. Unfortunately for Him, He is so low down in the list, His place in it is rather academic.
Likewise, Queen Mary, Grandmother of the present Queen was also in line to the Throne in Her own right.

2007-09-24 21:56:54 · answer #3 · answered by Raymo 6 · 0 1

Because when the rules weremade, Men were considered to be superior to women. therefore a king was considered superior to a Queen. If a queen's husband became King, he would be cosidered superior and this would go against the superiority of Royal Blood. Therefore they demoted a Queen's husband to Prince, and gave him the title of Prince Consort to mark him out as the queen's husband.

2016-05-17 11:14:33 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Since the Queen is the the direct descendant of the bloodline, she has the authority - she had the option to elevate her husband to King or allow him the title of Prince when she married him. By keeping him a "Prince," she remains in control of the Royals with the higher title of Queen.

2007-09-25 10:35:51 · answer #5 · answered by dlil 4 · 1 1

The husband of a reigning Queen is never called King. A King is a reigning monarch. In the case of the Duke of Edinburgh he was he was already Prince Philip of Greece when he married the Queen.
Due to the controversy over Prince Charles' second marriage it has been stated that, when he becomes King, her title will be Princess Consort. I think this is rubbish, of course she will become his queen!

2007-09-25 07:17:36 · answer #6 · answered by Beau Brummell 6 · 0 2

Because the husband does not automatically become King. Queen Liz II did not actually create Phil a prince until 10 years after they were married. He renounced his Greek citizenship to marry her, technically he was no longer a prince and had to be re-created after marriage. I think it took so long because he was dipping the wick in various places and she was not having that...

2007-09-26 05:42:03 · answer #7 · answered by Lady Miss Keir 3 · 0 0

When a King marries, his wife becomes Queen Consort (title given to the wife of a reigning king. Queens consort usually share their husbands' rank and hold the feminine equivalent of their husbands' monarchical titles. Most of the time, however, they have no real power) or Princess Consort (title given to the spouse of a king regnant, if the title queen consort is inappropriate).
When a Queen marries, her husband becomes King consort (symbolic title given in some monarchies to the husband of a queen regnant) or Prince Consort (is the husband of a Queen regnant, unless he himself also is a king in his own right). In the past, a King Consort could become co-sovereign and have equal powers as the Queen (this is also the main reason why Queen Elizabeth I never married because she did not want to share her powers with another man).
Spain, Portugal, England and Scotland have all had kings consort; however, since the rank of king normally outranks that of queen, in most monarchies the queen's husband is given the title of prince or prince consort instead. Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom did not create her husband Philip, Duke of Edinburgh a Prince of the United Kingdom until 1957, five years after her accession. He has never been formally designated Prince Consort or King Consort.
However, although the spouse of a reigning Queen could only be given a title as King Consort or Prince Consort (both only symbolic titles with no actual power) their offspring including both heir/heiress to the throne will become a member of the royal house of their father.
Queen Victoria (24 May 1819 – 22 January 1901) was the last British monarch of the House of Hanover. She married her first cousin Prince Albert from the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, and her first son, King Edward VII belonged to the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. The current House of Windsor is also a branch from the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, however, high anti-German feeling among the people during WWI prompted the Royal Family to abandon all titles held under the German crown and to change German-sounding titles and house names for English-sounding versions from Wettin to Windsor. The current official surname used for the House of Windsor is Mountbatten-Windsor (Mountbatten is Prince Philip’s surname).

2007-09-24 11:55:49 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

Royal standards have preference for men before women, by a law that has been in effect for centuries, the Sallic Law. Therefore, only men in royal bloodline acquire the title of King, when they ascend to the throne. In cases where there is no heir apparent to the throne, but an heiress (i.e. Quuen Elizabeth of Britain), only her acquires the title of Queen. Her husband can only be named Prince Consort, and all the tiltles he may have acquired, but not King.

2007-09-25 08:02:38 · answer #9 · answered by juan p 2 · 1 2

Elizabeth was named successor. She had the option of raising Philip to King, but declined, as Kings have precedence over Queens in the royal heirarchy.

Charles, if he's named successor (he may not be, in favor of his eldest son, due to the controversy that has plagued him due to his first marriage) would be King. However, Camille Bowles-Parker would keep her current title, which is Duchess of, I think, Cornwall, since Elizaneth chose not to give her the title of princess.

2007-09-24 10:13:56 · answer #10 · answered by BROOOOOKLYN 5 · 1 1

It is as men were always, and sometimes still are, as the better ruler and more powerful. Therefore the title of Queen is lower than the title of King, so if the heir to the throne is a woman, and they are married, when they become monarch they become Queen, but their husband does not become King, as this would mean he was higher up in the monarchy than his wife.
Like our Queen now, Prince Philip was not the heir to the English throne, but instead married into royalty, so if he was given the title of King, then this would overule his wife.
Very sexist i know, but it's the way things work! xx

2007-09-24 09:03:35 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2 4

fedest.com, questions and answers