Question about British royalty ...

[Kablooie]

If William becomes king, Kate, a commoner, becomes queen.

If William then dies, does Kate remain Queen of England or does the monarchy pass down to a born royal?

Can a commoner who marries into royalty become the sole monarch of Britain?

[WillParkinson]

1. Try this...

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20101123171926AABrbOy

[Posteritatis]

2. There've been umpteen different instances of this question here the last couple of days

There's an established list several hundred names deep.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_of_succession_to_the_British_throne

[LeftishBrit]

3. No; if Will becomes king and later dies, then the monarchy would pass to a born-royal heir

Will's oldest child* if he has one; otherwise his brother Harry.

If it was their child who became the Monarch, Kate would then become the Queen Mother.

For example, Elizabeth's father George VI was married to Elizabeth, who was referred to as Queen. When he died, their daughter became Queen Elizabeth II - and has remained so for nearly 60 years now. Her mother became Elizabeth the Queen Mother, and as she outlived her husband for about 50 years, she was in this position for a long time.


*At present, specifically his eldest *son* would precede any daughter, but this rule is likely to be changed by the time he becomes king.

[Kablooie]

4. Got it. Danged complex, all these Britisher titles and positions.

[enlightenment]

6. "Britisher"?

What is a 'Britisher'?

Is that like an 'Americaner' - or perhaps more like a 'Frencher' or a 'Germaner' or 'Slovakianer'?

You may not perceive that as thoughtless and rude, but it is, and I would think beneath a DUer (though based on what I've seen on DU the past few months, perhaps not).

[BOG PERSON]

7. chill out, dude

it's not like britishers are an oppressed minority or something

[hlthe2b]

10. LOL....

Sigh...

[Kablooie]

13. Don't know where you got rudeness from that.

Britisher <ˈbrɪtɪʃə>
n (not used by the British)
1. a native or inhabitant of Great Britain
2. any British subject

Kinda goes with the informality of "dang".

The way some Americaneers tawk, dya know?

[enlightenment]

16. Perhaps from the

'not used by the British'.

Just because you don't find it rude doesn't mean it isn't.

It's kind of like 'ugly American' - not quite vulgar, but dismissive and rude all the same.

[BillyJack]

5. It's all about "the blood"

One doesn't get to 'sit on the throne' unless you've got the royal DNA in you. Marrying into the royals may get you a very honorary position, aka Elizabeth II's mom, the Queen Mother - but NEVER sit on the throne.

ALSO, one is not able to be called Prince or Princess XXX, unless you have the royal family DNA in you. For example, Andrew's children (Andrew is Prince Charles' brother, QE II son). They are allowed to be called Princess Eugenia and Princess Beatrice. Their mother, Sarah Ferguson, could never be called Princess Sarah. Likewise, Lady Diana was never able to be called Princess Diana (although some people/media erroneously referred to her this way - I think "Diana, Princess of Wales would have been okay, but notice how the "princess" part comes after the name and goes with the title b/c of the marriage into the royal blood).

Hope that helps.

[hlthe2b]

11. Actually no... they can have it conferred, though never able to reign

It is not true they can not be a Princess, Prince, or even King or Queen, as they CAN be a Princess, Prince, or even King or Queen CONSORT.

The difference is that it is conferred and they can NEVER ascend to the throne. To be in the line of reign, it does require being within the blood line of inheritance. The Queen (Elizabeth II) is the Queen Regnant. Had Charles and Diana remained together and Charles ascended during her lifetime, Charles would be King (King Regnant) and Diana, presumably Queen Regnant. I say presumably because, it appears that the conference is not always automatic. Prince Philip, for instance is NOT King Regnant (though Queen Elizabeth COULD have made him so)....Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom (acceded 1952) 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, yet he is still entitled to be called "Prince".

[mysuzuki2]

15. after their wedding night

I'm sure Kate had plenty of royal DNA in her.

[coalition_unwilling]

22. Ha! Good one. Reminds me of a Royal joke:

"Balls!" said the Queen. "If I had two, I'd be King." :)

[hlthe2b]

8. No... she would become Queen Consort but not Queen Regnant

The former is conferred only because of marriage, but has no right to reign.

Once William ascends to the Throne, Kate will automatically become his Queen. However, she will be Queen Consort(that's someone who becomes Queen by virtue of marriage, not birthright) and as such is NOT in the line of the succession. Other examples of Queen Consorts: Queen Sofia of Spain, Queen Rania of Jordan, Queen Noor of Jordan, Queen Silvia of Sweden, etc.

Kate can NEVER become Queen Regnant though. Queen Regnant is someone who ascends to the Throne by virtue of birthright (she was next in the Line to the Throne): Queen Elizabeth II, Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands, Queen Margrethe of Denmark, etc. are all Queens Regnant.

[kestrel91316]

9. When William is King (the monarch), Kate will hold the title Queen as his wife.

But she is not anywhere in the line of succession, so she can never be Queen (the monarch).

[Raine]

12. No just as Phillip will not become King when Q. Elizabeth dies.

Charles will be king if he outlives his mother, if not then William becomes King.

[sarge43]

14. No.

She isn't in the order of succession. If there are children, she would be Queen Mother. If they have a son, he becomes king. If no son, daughter becomes queen regnant. If no children, she would be a queen dowager and Prince Henry becomes king. Her status as a commoner (a commoner is anyone who does not hold a royal or peerage title and can stand for parliament) isn't the issue. For the record both Queen Mother Elizabeth and Princess Diana were born commoners. Their titles before marriage "Lady" are courtesy titles only.

[LibertyLover]

17. `In that instance Kate would become the dowager queen.

She would never become what is known as queen regnant. Either her and William's child would take the throne or the throne would pass to Harry.

[david13]

18. Generally she would be queen consort, not queen. Just like Phillip

a Greek prince is not even king consort, but merely duke, as that was what parliament determined.
They are the ones who determine what goes on. And over the many years they have brought in total non relatives.
In fact all the Windsors, the Mountbattens are actually Germans. It was only WWI when Lord Louie, aka Dickie Mountbatten changed the family name from Battenburg to Mountbatten, and had the others adopt the name Windsor. It isn't even a name, it's just derived from their castle.
Windsor castle. They had the castle before they had the name.
So the truth is, anything under the sun can be done, and in fact has been done in the past.
Where did James I come from?
dc

[BillyJack]

19. Interesting.....

thank you.

[ChazII]

21. James I came from Scotland

where I believe he was James VI.

[LynneSin]

20. William wouldn't be 3rd in line if that was the case...

because then technically Prince Phillip (the Queen's hubby) would take over, then Charles and I guess that would mean Camila then.

Only descendents can take over the throne. Should a spouse survive I guess they become like the 'Queen Mother'.