Why is there no King at the wedding?

You can’t marry the queen and then be king. Doesn’t work like that.

If Charles takes the throne when the Queen dies, he’ll be King. The last King was her father.

The Queen is the Regent and she’s married to Phillip, who was Duke of Edinburgh. he doesn’t become king because he’s married to the Queen. The Queen’s father was a King, but she’s first born so she became Queen. When she steps down, Charles will take the crown and be King and then his first born, William, after him will take the crown after him and be King when his time comes.

When she retires and Charles becomes king, she will be referred to as The Queen Mother, as her mother was.

I get it! Thanks! I’m sure I knew that at some point but it was probably pushed out of my mind by some engineering equation.

Am curious to know why Charles isn’t already king. In other cases, when the king dies, doesn’t the kingship automatically go to the next male in line, regardless of the queen’s disposition?

Will Kate ever be called “queen”? (when William is king) Or will she always be called “princess”?

@robmandu Elizabeth was the next in line after her father. Charles was a boy when she became queen and can’t take over until she dies or gives it up.

I also watched a bit – @worriedguy – I don’t know all that much about the royal family – but I learned a lot from the King’s Speech – which is worth the ticket anyway.

@robmandu In England, it’s written that a female first born can take the throne. Not all monarchies are like that.

Norway, for example.. the first born to the current King and Queen was a girl, Martha Louise, and she can’t take the throne because it was not in our ‘grunnloven’... constitution, if you will. So, her younger brother, by 2 years, Haakon, will take the throne when his father dies. They have since changed this rule but it’s not ‘retroactive’ if you will, so Haakon’s daughter, Princess Ingrid Alexandra, will be able to be Queen but Martha Louise misses out.

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

omg I know a lot of useless crap

What are you talking about? There’s six kings at the wedding:

King Simeon II of Bulgaria
King Constantine of the Hellenes
King Harald V of Norway
King Michael I of Romania
King Mswati III of Swaziland
King George Tupou V of Tonga

@AstroChuck I’m glad you straightened us out. I hope they’re not all related. The 4 generation tree was complicated enough .

Took me a while to figure this out as well. I could never figure out why Elizabeth II was queen when her mother was still alive. Only the one who is the heir to the throne is King or Queen. Their spouse is not.

@cazzie very minor correction – Elizabeth became Queen because she was first born – AND she had no brothers. Per UK law, male descendents (and their entire line) have precedence over females, even if the males are younger.

@cazzie also, a significantly less minor correction – QEII will never be Queen Mother. “Queen Mother” is the term for the widowed former Queen Consort. ie, when a King dies and his son or daughter becomes monarch, his wife (who until that time had been Queen Consort) becomes Queen Mother.

In more simple terms, a Queen Mother is the former wife-of-the-King, not the former female Monarch.

Also, the Queen cannot “retire” and simply declare her son to become King. Charles will become King only when A) his mother dies, or B) his mother abidcates the thrown. That’s not going to happen. And if she did abdicate, that would leave her with no standing of any kind, certainly not Queen Mother.

Thanks, @MrItty . I had no idea. I always thought “queen mother” was just an affectionate nickname for only Elizabeth II’s mum. I also didn’t know that the queen couldn’t simply retire. Let’s hope she outlives Charles!

@MrItty i wondered about the ‘queen mother’ title and tried to look it up and didn’t find anything, so thanks for that.

So..how would one end up with a King and a Queen simultaneously?

In the British system, there is only one true monarch or regent. By tradition, the wife of the King regent is titled “Queen”. More officially, she’s the “Queen consort”. The husband of a Queen regent could theoretically be given the title of “King consort”, but this is uncommon. For example, when Elizabeth ascended to the Throne upon the death of her father, she gave her husband Phillip the official title: His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh.

So because William is Duke of Cambridge, is Kate now Duchess? Is she Princess as well, because he’s also Prince? Royalty is hard.

Kate is Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge. She will be Queen when Prince William becomes King but she will be Queen Consort.

@knitfroggy if Prince William becomes king and Catherine will be the queen; should she outlive William will she be queen of England or will she have to give up the throne to Prince Harry?....
swoo! like @Seelix said, royalty is hard.

@AmWiser I don’t know for sure, but my guess is, William and Kate’s first born would be next in line over Harry. Prince Charles in next in line for the throne after his mother and William will get it when Prince Charles dies. I think Kate would go to being the Queen/King Mother? I agree, I’m confused too

Prince William’s heir will be first in line to the throne. The line goes down first and then across.

@cazzie Queen Elizabeth II is not the Regent, but rather the monarch. She’s not ruling because the king is a minor, incapacitated, or away, but in her own right. Regency is when you rule for someone else – like when the king is crowned when he’s 9, so his mother rules until he’s 18, or if a king is away in battle and changes his Queen from Consort to Regent.

@AstroChuck There are six kings…

@worriedguy They very well may be all related. Cue banjo music…

@MyNewtBoobs did I call her Regent? uff… I translated it wrong. I think I was going for Sovereign.

@cazzie What language were you translating from?

@MyNewtBoobs in my head swims a mix of Norwegian and English

@AmWiser Kate cannot “give up the Throne” because the Throne will never be hers. She is not in the Royal line of succession in any way. She will never be ruler or monarch. Not now, not when Harry is King, not when Harry passes away. She is now Duchess, she may have another title granted to her (like Princess) when Charles becomes King, and she will probably be Queen Consort when Harry becomes king. But “Queen Consort” simply means “wife of the King”. It is not a ruling title or indicative of any authority or claim to the throne of any kind.

@MrItty, I think you mean William, not Harry.

@Jeruba… yes. Yes I do. Sorry.

@MrItty thank you so very much for the information.;-)

I wish one of those guys would come on here and ‘splain it to us.

Harry will more than likely never be king, or his children, either. The only way that could happen is if William had no children, or if his line totally died out. That could either never happen, or could happen generations down the line. In that case, they would have to backtrack to Harry’s descendants. This has happened before, and they had to go back a hundred years!

@Skaggfacemutt Or if William dies before taking the throne and conceiving of an heir, or after taking the throne but before conceiving an heir. Because Harry’s the spare.

@MyNewtBoobs actually, even if William died after producing heirs but before ascending to the throne, his heirs would still be before Harry on the line of succession. A person’s death only means that person can’t be monarch (obviously). It doesn’t change the order of succession in any way.

@MrItty You’re right, I forgot to write that it. So I edited it in.

to put it another way, right now the line of succession goes:
1) Queen Elizabeth
2) Charles, Elizabeth’s oldest son
3) William, Charles’s oldest son
4) Harry, Charles’s second son
5) Andrew, Elizabeth’s second son
6) Beatrice, Andrew’s oldest daughter
7) Eugene, Andrew’s oldest daughter
<etc>

The instant William has a child, that child will immediately become #4, and everyone from Harry on down will move down one number. At that point, it doesn’t matter when William dies, Wiliam’s child will always be before Harry.

Oh sure do an edit while I’m typing a long answer. Make me look silly. :-P

@MrItty Lol Sorry.

As for “more than likely never be king”, keep in mind that Elizabeth’s father was never supposed to be king either. George VI was the younger son of George V, much like Harry is the younger son of Charles. George VI’s older son, Edward VIII, ascended to the throne, but voluntarily gave it up so that he could marry an American divorcee, in contrast with the regulations of the Anglican church. The document he signed removed not only himself but his entire line from the line of succession, and his younger brother George VI took over. If not for that unexpected occurrence, Elizabeth and her line would never have ascended.

@MrItty Indeed. It’s only very unlikely if things go as planned; things rarely go according to plan.

@MrItty That is why I said “more than likely.” That scenario with Edward VIII was not a very likely occurance. But as @MyNewtBoobs mentioned, stranger things have happened.

Oh my!