Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    A while ago it was decided that a woman should be in line to the british throne ahead of her younger male sibling. This, to me, seems perfectly reasonable.

    One thing I'm wondering though is it has always been the way that a kings wife is a queen (well, queen consort technically), whereas a queens husband is never a king. Has this changed or is there any indication of it changing? If not then why not?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    This has not always been the case. Mary I of England was heir to Henry VIII and her husband, a Spanish King, consequently became King of England also.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    If I, let's call me Miss Crozibear, were to marry some poor dude, we wouldn't become Mr and Mrs Crozibear. We would be Mr and Mrs Poor Dude.

    Idk, that's how I've always seen that second thing.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EdmundWoodstock)
    This has not always been the case. Mary I of England was heir to Henry VIII and her husband, a Spanish King, consequently became King of England also.
    Ok, in the case of a king already being a king the title seems to hold, but it's not given upon marriage like queen consort is.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by crozibear96)
    If I, let's call me Miss Crozibear, were to marry some poor dude, we wouldn't become Mr and Mrs Crozibear. We would be Mr and Mrs Poor Dude.

    Idk, that's how I've always seen that second thing.
    This is seemingly becoming less and less common, and many don't agree with it because it's seen as sexist. The reason royal succession rules were changed was due to a desire for equality between the sexes, so why is the same equality not applied to titles?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dheorl)
    Ok, in the case of a king already being a king the title seems to hold, but it's not given upon marriage like queen consort is.
    He was king of a different country though, so I don't see why that would apply to him being king of England. He very easily could have been King of Spain and Prince Consort of England.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EdmundWoodstock)
    He was king of a different country though, so I don't see why that would apply to him being king of England. He very easily could have been King of Spain and Prince Consort of England.
    He could have been, you're right.

    Maybe I should have said why is it not standard practice for the husband of a queen to be a king consort?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dheorl)
    He could have been, you're right.

    Maybe I should have said why is it not standard practice for the husband of a queen to be a king consort?
    Perhaps because traditionally a king wielded power, whereas the role of a queen was largely ceremonial? So if it was actually the woman who was heir to the throne, her husband becoming king may have effectively rendered her powerless?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EdmundWoodstock)
    Perhaps because traditionally a king wielded power, whereas the role of a queen was largely ceremonial? So if it was actually the woman who was heir to the throne, her husband becoming king may have effectively rendered her powerless?
    And traditionally male heirs took preference in regards to succeeding the throne. Seeing as they are now equal in that respect I'm just curious to see if they will be in other ways.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EdmundWoodstock)
    This has not always been the case. Mary I of England was heir to Henry VIII and her husband, a Spanish King, consequently became King of England also.
    No he didn't.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingStannis)
    No he didn't.
    Yes he did, he reigned as King of England and Ireland from 1554-1558

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_II_of_Spain
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    The whole notion of royalty screams inequality. Gender equality is the very least of it.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EdmundWoodstock)
    Yes he did, he reigned as King of England and Ireland from 1554-1558

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_II_of_Spain
    Not in the conventional sense. He was not above Mary like a King would normally be.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingStannis)
    Not in the conventional sense. He was not above Mary like a King would normally be.
    I know, he wasn't above Mary, iirc they were joint monarchs although in practice he was in Spain most of the time and didn't really have anything to do with ruling England.
 
 
 

3,314

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should universities take a stronger line on drugs?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.