# The Queen has died



## Morrus (Sep 8, 2022)

Very occasionally, when major world events occur, we allow a thread on the topic.

This is NOT the place to share your thoughts on monarchy. There are plenty of places on the web where you can do that.

The Queen died at Balmoral at age 96 after a 70 year reign.









						Queen Elizabeth II has died
					

Her son King Charles III pays tribute to his "beloved mother" who has died peacefully at Balmoral.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## John R Davis (Sep 8, 2022)

Very sad when anyone's passes. May be a few unhappy days at life & work ahead.
Long Live The King.


----------



## CleverNickName (Sep 8, 2022)

Woah...the end of an era.


----------



## HawaiiSteveO (Sep 8, 2022)

Fascinating life, end of era indeed.


----------



## South by Southwest (Sep 8, 2022)

Hers was an extraordinary reign. To those across the Pond, I am sorry.

May Charles rise to the task.


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (Sep 8, 2022)

Morrus said:


> The Queen died at Balmoral at age 96 after a 70 year reign.




It's hard to imagine. This forum skews old, but even so ... there are precious few that can even remember a time when she was not Queen. 

It's unsettling, in the sense that you knew the day must come, yet somehow assumed it never would.


----------



## Dioltach (Sep 8, 2022)

A 70-year reign, not many people will remember a time before she was on the throne. One of my last memories from living in England (before moving to the Netherlands when I was 4) was her Silver Jubilee celebrations in 1977. It's amazing to think that almost my whole life ago she'd already been on the throne for 25 years. (Here in the Netherlands we're already on our third monarch since then.)


----------



## payn (Sep 8, 2022)




----------



## the Jester (Sep 8, 2022)

She's the only English Queen that has reigned in my life, and I'm getting old. I hope she went peacefully and without pain, offer my condolences to her family, friends, and subjects, and wish you all the best in the future with whatever happens next- presumably the ascension of Charles, probably as King George VII.


----------



## Morrus (Sep 8, 2022)

the Jester said:


> presumably the ascension of Charles, probably as King George VII.



It's been confirmed he's King Charles III.


----------



## Warpiglet-7 (Sep 8, 2022)

I am not English but have always wished her and her family well.

She lived an admirable life!  It’s kind of weird how when the world changes around you you realize there is no going back.

Weird feeling when favored musicians pass too…but even more with some of these big historical figures…


----------



## the Jester (Sep 8, 2022)

Morrus said:


> It's been confirmed he's King Charles III.



Huh, I have long seen assertions that he was going to avoid his birth name as his regnant name because he wanted to avoid association with the Stuart Kings Charles, one of whom was beheaded and the other of whom was (I have read) a notorious philanderer. I guess all that must have been speculation! Charles III it is, I guess!

In any case, I extend my sympathy for all those grieving.


----------



## GuyBoy (Sep 8, 2022)

RIP Queen Elizabeth II


----------



## Dioltach (Sep 8, 2022)

Not to be disrespectful, but I hope someone took the opportunity to test Ly Tin Wheedle's theory that monarchy is the only thing that travels faster than the speed of light.


----------



## John R Davis (Sep 8, 2022)

Morrus said:


> It's been confirmed he's King Charles III.



Bugger. Missed the chance of a King Arthur


----------



## Ralif Redhammer (Sep 8, 2022)

I don't know that I can say it's a sad occasion when someone I didn't know dies at 96 (we should all be so lucky to live that long, be wealthy, and end up in the history books for not-terrible stuff), but it is a solemn occasion.

Saying "King Charles" just sounds strange, but I imagine I'll get used to it. I can remember watching the animated cartoon "The Legend of Lochnagar," based on a book he wrote, when I was a kid.


----------



## Willie the Duck (Sep 8, 2022)

Dioltach said:


> A 70-year reign, not many people will remember a time before she was on the throne.



Much like the end of WWII, there are still plenty of people who were present for it, but certainly a dwindling supply who were of an age where you have a strong memory of what it was like before, and even fewer who were adults or nearly so. 

I kind of expected to outlive her, yet at the same time I didn't really expect her to die. She was one of those people who'd been remarked about seeming unaging (Prince, Patrick Stewart, Dick Clark) or long-lived (Bob Hope, George Burns, Olivia de Havilland) that when they start to look old or pass away it kinda violates your understanding of who they are or what they represent to you. She was just supposed to be there -- not always in a supernatural way, but always in a 'I had no conception of this happening' kind of way. 

I am certainly, first and foremost, glad for her life and wishing kindness on those who loved her. Second to that, it just feels very strange that this completely predictable event would seem so strange.
​


----------



## Benjamin Olson (Sep 8, 2022)

the Jester said:


> Huh, I have long seen assertions that he was going to avoid his birth name as his regnant name because he wanted to avoid association with the Stuart Kings Charles, one of whom was beheaded and the other of whom was (I have read) a notorious philanderer. I guess all that must have been speculation! Charles III it is, I guess!




Regnal names are always a little bit odd, but when you've been widely known to the public by one name for seven decades trying to rebrand seems particularly silly. 

It would be even sillier when the rebrand is to avoid associations with a couple of 17th century monarchs whose poor reputations are too entwined with a historical period few people understand for many members of the public to have a clear idea what's even wrong with the name Charles.

It might have made sense to a more educated and royalty focused class of pundits to change his name. To people who know the royal history well, are familiar with concepts like adopting a separate regnal name that have not actually been in use in recent history, and, as is the way with people steeped in history of institutions, at times have a blind spot about how the prior dynamics of those institutions are no longer really in effect, changing the name made sense. But I don't think it makes actual practical sense.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Sep 8, 2022)

To everyone who is saddened and impacted by this news, my sympathies.


----------



## Ulfgeir (Sep 8, 2022)

She had a long reign. It is the end of an era for many.


----------



## delericho (Sep 8, 2022)

I met her once, ages ago.

I find it strangely comparable to when Thatcher was forced to resign - at that point she'd been the only PM I'd known, and it had seemed she'd go on forever.

It's fair to say I have much fonder memories of QE2, though!


----------



## Aeson (Sep 8, 2022)

I found the news shocking and saddening. Her passing is a loss to all. My condolences to the family and the nation.


----------



## reelo (Sep 8, 2022)

the Jester said:


> Huh, I have long seen assertions that he was going to avoid his birth name as his regnant name because he wanted to avoid association with the Stuart Kings Charles, one of whom was beheaded and the other of whom was (I have read) a notorious philanderer. I guess all that must have been speculation! Charles III it is, I guess!
> 
> In any case, I extend my sympathy for all those grieving.





John R Davis said:


> Bugger. Missed the chance of a King Arthur



He should go with something a bit more traditional. Æthelstan or Eadwig, or Æthelred, or Harthacnut. 

But then again, they can now stamp "CAROLUS REX" on their money.


----------



## MarkB (Sep 8, 2022)

Wow, that news hits a lot harder than I'd have ever expected.


----------



## Vael (Sep 8, 2022)

My grandparents met during her coronation celebrations. This is the end of an era.


----------



## Quartz (Sep 8, 2022)

RIP Your Majesty.

Long live the king!


----------



## beancounter (Sep 8, 2022)

My condolences to her family.

I remember hearing at some point that Charles had planned on abdicating his throne to William shortly after the death of the queen.


----------



## CleverNickName (Sep 8, 2022)

beancounter said:


> My condolences to her family.
> 
> I remember hearing at some point that Charles had planned on abdicating his thone to William shortly after the death of the queen.



I remember hearing that too, but I think it was just the internet rumor-mill.  It wouldn't be a _terrible_ move for the monarchy; Prince William is more charismatic than King Charles, and enjoys a higher public opinion.  

(My two U.S. pennies, anyway.)


----------



## Zardnaar (Sep 8, 2022)

Might be flow in effects here but she which way Australia jumps.


----------



## Blue Orange (Sep 8, 2022)

My condolences from across the pond.


----------



## Ancalagon (Sep 9, 2022)

1755, we remember


----------



## Xyxox (Sep 9, 2022)

My mother was 13 when she was crowned queen. She has been Queen of England my entire life. As a child I was taught of her reign in grade school even here in America. As others have said, the end of an era. Long live King Charles III.


----------



## aco175 (Sep 9, 2022)

I'm just a Yank from across the pond, but when I heard it today I felt a pang of sadness for the world.  She felt eternal.


----------



## MGibster (Sep 9, 2022)

It's like the sun goes down one night and one of the stars you've seen in the sky your entire life is suddenly gone.  It's just weird to think of a world without Queen Elizabeth.


----------



## trappedslider (Sep 9, 2022)

reelo said:


> He should go with something a bit more traditional. Æthelstan or Eadwig, or Æthelred, or Harthacnut.








and the only reason why he's king anyway is that Megan put the sword back


----------



## Arilyn (Sep 9, 2022)

A very gracious lady and queen. She felt eternal.


----------



## John R Davis (Sep 9, 2022)

We do need Charles to be King for sometime.
The last thing our next heir needs is to be a child when they get that mantle. They need to have finished education, made some mistakes, got drunk, has a special " friend" or two and basically lived a bit before William ascends and the next in line is declared.

Long live the King.


----------



## delericho (Sep 9, 2022)

John R Davis said:


> We do need Charles to be King for sometime.
> The last thing our next heir needs is to be a child when they get that mantle. They need to have finished education, made some mistakes, got drunk, has a special " friend" or two and basically lived a bit before William ascends and the next in line is declared.



??

Prince William is 40, has been married for 11 years, has 3 children... I _really_ can't see Charles stepping aside, but William is no child. Were you maybe thinking of George?


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Sep 9, 2022)

I’m an American, and I _feel_ this passing.  The world lost a lot.

She oversaw 70+ years of change as the nominal ruler of this country.  She helped create the “rules” by which monarchs and other leaders interact with mass media, especially visual media.

She didn’t always get it right, being human.  But still, she had a deep well of experience with war, with leadership, with diplomacy that most of her peers- elected or hereditary- probably envied.  I‘m hoping Charles and her other descendants were paying close attention.


----------



## John R Davis (Sep 9, 2022)

delericho said:


> ??
> 
> Prince William is 40, has been married for 11 years, has 3 children... I _really_ can't see Charles stepping aside, but William is no child. Were you maybe thinking of George?



Yes. Sorry if I didnt make that clear? Heir to the throne ( George or sibling) could do with being in his 20s and have lived a bit before taking on the duties as " heir to the throne". So Charles needs a good 15 years at least as king


----------



## delericho (Sep 9, 2022)

John R Davis said:


> Yes. Sorry if I didnt make that clear? Heir to the throne ( George or sibling) could do with being in his 20s and have lived a bit before taking on the duties as " heir to the throne". So Charles needs a good 15 years at least as king



Ah, I see.

I don't think it matters. Charles became heir at 4. At that age, the 'job' is essentially nonexistent.


----------



## John R Davis (Sep 9, 2022)

delericho said:


> Ah, I see.
> 
> I don't think it matters. Charles became heir at 4. At that age, the 'job' is essentially nonexistent.



I disagree in the modern age. And it didn't do him any favours being heir at a young age. Not good for a person.


----------



## Nutation (Sep 9, 2022)

So many amazing facts and superlatives from her life - the number of PMs during her reign (15), the number of world leaders she met (uncounted). _The Trucker_ reported her death because she was one of them, a big truck driver.
Here's one that stick out to me, she was on the cover of TIME Magazine in 1929!


----------



## Davies (Sep 9, 2022)

John R Davis said:


> Yes. Sorry if I didnt make that clear? Heir to the throne ( George or sibling) could do with being in his 20s and have lived a bit before taking on the duties as " heir to the throne". So Charles needs a good 15 years at least as king



... not impossible, as he could easily live to be 88, but not likely. (On the other side, though, "abdication" is a swear word to his family, so.)


----------



## Tonguez (Sep 9, 2022)

the Jester said:


> Huh, I have long seen assertions that he was going to avoid his birth name as his regnant name because he wanted to avoid association with the Stuart Kings Charles, one of whom was beheaded and the other of whom was (I have read) a notorious philanderer. I guess all that must have been speculation! Charles III it is, I guess!
> 
> In any case, I extend my sympathy for all those grieving.



Lets hope its not prophetic, I do think that William would do a better job as the Monarchy does need a big injection of charisma and goodwill right now. A younger, but mature man (like William) would garner more support in my opinion. 

but yes Queen Liz has had a long and illustrious career, my mother is a royalist, and I too respect her for what she has done in her role


----------



## MarkB (Sep 9, 2022)

Tonguez said:


> Lets hope its not prophetic, I do think that William would do a better job as the Monarchy does need a big injection of charisma and goodwill right now. A younger, but mature man (like William) would garner more support in my opinion.



Yeah, Charles has been an heir for longer than most kings have lived. Is he he oldest person to become king?


----------



## Nutation (Sep 9, 2022)

MarkB said:


> Yeah, Charles has been an heir for longer than most kings have lived. Is he he oldest person to become king?



In the UK, yes. There may be more extreme examples elsewhere. He was also 3 when his mother became monarch, so he's had 70 years as the presumptive heir.


----------



## Umbran (Sep 9, 2022)

John R Davis said:


> I disagree in the modern age. And it didn't do him any favours being heir at a young age. Not good for a person.




We might look at child move and TV starts for some idea of how impactful it can be.  The experience would be _different_, obviously - there's a whole government there to make sure you don't publicly flame out.  But in terms of _magnitude_, it might be a starting place.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Sep 10, 2022)

My condolences to the people of Great Britain and the Commonwealth. It's the end of an era.

Best wishes for King Charles III.


----------



## Galandris (Sep 10, 2022)

Nutation said:


> In the UK, yes. There may be more extreme examples elsewhere. He was also 3 when his mother became monarch, so he's had 70 years as the presumptive heir.




He might very well be the worldwide contender. It was rare in the past to reach a very old age and precedents are more common to have a long-lived ruler outliving his children and have the crown pass to grandsons. On the other hand, he's probably beaten by many elected leaders as the oldest person to become head of state.

To put things in perspective, 80% of the world population is younger than the length of Elizabeth II's reign, so for a huge majority of people, she has been the queen "forever".


----------



## Davies (Sep 10, 2022)

Galandris said:


> He might very well be the worldwide contender.



Nope. Franz I (1853-1938), younger brother of Johann II, Prince of Liechtenstein (1840-1929) succeeded his brother on the latter's death and ruled over the principality until his own. At seventy-five, he was roughly two years older than King Charles III.


----------



## the Jester (Sep 10, 2022)

MarkB said:


> Yeah, Charles has been an heir for longer than most kings have lived. Is he he oldest person to become king?



I think there's a very good chance that this was Pharaoh Merenre Nemtyemsaf II, who ruled for only 13 months after his father/predecessor's (most likely) *93 year *reign. His father- Pepi II- ascended at the age of 6, so he died at around 99. So Merenre likely ascended as a very old man. I'm not entirely certain that he was the first born child, as I'm not exactly a historian of Egypt, but he basically saw the end of the Old Kingdom as it crumbled around him.


----------



## trappedslider (Sep 10, 2022)




----------



## Aeson (Sep 10, 2022)

trappedslider said:


> View attachment 261012



Too soon, Dude. Betty hasn't been dead long enough for jokes about her death. Bad taste, man.. bad taste. smh


----------



## Zardnaar (Sep 10, 2022)

Aeson said:


> Too soon, Dude. Betty hasn't been dead long enough for jokes about her death. Bad taste, man.. bad taste. smh




 Jokes here about our former head of state started turning up a few hours later.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Sep 10, 2022)

You know, people of the Commonwealth, or of Great Britain directly, or who freed themselves from English rule in living memory, I can understand celebrating the death of the monarch who has occupied that throne for the best part of a century, or being very emotionally moved by it. 

But like, for the rest of us this is basically a celebrity passing? Idk why Americans are passionate about it.


----------



## Zardnaar (Sep 10, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> You know, people of the Commonwealth, or of Great Britain directly, or who freed themselves from English rule in living memory, I can understand celebrating the death of the monarch who has occupied that throne for the best part of a century, or being very emotionally moved by it.
> 
> But like, for the rest of us this is basically a celebrity passing? Idk why Americans are passionate about it.




 Monarchy isn't universally popular here with republic types and some Maori. Espicially the Maori.


----------



## Aeson (Sep 10, 2022)

Zardnaar said:


> Jokes here about our former head of state started turning up a few hours later.



I was talking about Betty White. Not just a national treasure, but a global treasure. And was making a joke of my own, or trying to.

I'm curious if a big deal would have been made if Betty out lived The Queen. Like George Burns, people were obsessed with her age and apparent vitality.


----------



## Morrus (Sep 10, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> But like, for the rest of us this is basically a celebrity passing? Idk why Americans are passionate about it.



People care when celebrities die too.


----------



## Tonguez (Sep 10, 2022)

Zardnaar said:


> Monarchy isn't universally popular here with republic types and some Maori. Espicially the Maori.



Thats not at all true. The majority of republicans are of European descent

Even Hone Harawira is pro-monarchy, the Treaty of Waitangi was signed on behalf of Queen Victoria and is still held as a covenant between the British Monarch and Maori.


----------



## Tonguez (Sep 10, 2022)

Aeson said:


> I was talking about Betty White. Not just a national treasure, but a global treasure. And was making a joke of my own, or trying to.



global treasure? As far as I can tell its only Americans who care about Betty


----------



## Morrus (Sep 10, 2022)

In case I wasn’t clear we’re not going to be discussing politics or our thoughts on monarchy on this forum. Please take that discussion elsewhere.


----------



## Maxperson (Sep 10, 2022)

Morrus said:


> People care when celebrities die too.



Plus Americans(including myself) have a fascination with England and the monarchy.  Probably because of our origins.  I'll skip virtually every celebrity article, because I don't care who's marrying who or who cheated on who, but I'll click on most articles concerning the royal family. And I get a small kick when I drive through Montecito on the way to Santa Barbara, because that's where Harry lives now.


----------



## Ryujin (Sep 10, 2022)

I'm going to miss the annual address by our nation's Stately Grandmother, every Christmas. Safe passage, Your Majesty


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Sep 10, 2022)

Zardnaar said:


> Monarchy isn't universally popular here with republic types and some Maori. Espicially the Maori.



Sure, and someone whose family’s oppression came at the hands of people who ostensibly worked for the British monarchs, I get. 


Morrus said:


> People care when celebrities die too.



Sure, but it’s hardly the same. The Queen didn’t create art that is deeply meaningful for someone, she’s just a public figure. The celebration I’ve seen is especially confusing. 

I toasted with friends when Thatcher died, but Her Majesty was hardly a Thatcher.


----------



## Galandris (Sep 10, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Sure, but it’s hardly the same. The Queen didn’t create art that is deeply meaningful for someone, she’s just a public figure. The celebration I’ve seen is especially confusing.




She's a head of state, not just a youtube influencer. If a US president died in office, wouldn't people react as well? Even former head of states cause that (Gorbatchev died a few days ago and people "felt" something as well, despite his mandate having ended 40ish years ago). Imagine him dying 40 years ago while in office...

Edit: Technically, she did create art (starring in James Bond and Paddington).


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Sep 10, 2022)

It is a quite unique thing. There are not many people that lived a life as long as she did, and it sad to hear them pass, because of all the things the experienced will be lost, and only the memories of those that knew the person (and are still alive) remain. 
She was the Queen of a large nation (or commonwealth or whatever the exact expression is) and she experienced and influenced a lot of events and people that had effect on many people across the world. She was a quite unusual witness of - and agent in - history, and her direct experiences will be lost now, too. One can hope that she managed to instill some of the lessons she learned on others...


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Sep 10, 2022)

Galandris said:


> She's a head of state, not just a youtube influencer. If a US president died in office, wouldn't people react as well? Even former head of states cause that (Gorbatchev died a few days ago and people "felt" something as well, despite his mandate having ended 40ish years ago). Imagine him dying 40 years ago while in office...
> 
> Edit: Technically, she did create art (starring in James Bond and Paddington).



Okay perhaps I didn’t communicate well, idk, but it seems like the point is being pointedly missed in favor of argumentative attempts at “correction”, so I’m just going to drop it.


----------



## Galandris (Sep 10, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Okay perhaps I didn’t communicate well, idk, but it seems like the point is being pointedly missed in favor of argumentative attempts at “correction”, so I’m just going to drop it.




Sorry, but your point seemed that you didn't undestand _why_ so many people felt something about her death, outside of the UK. What sort of answers are you expecting outside explanation that:

1. for some people, she was the ruler of a country and it is not unusual for head of state to generate reactions among other people, especially when they are important/long running, even outside their home country.
2. for other people, she was associated with a saga that started with Lady Diana and continued with Meghan Marckle and William (or Harry, I don't know which is which) and made people magazine sell millions of issues, so they feel a page has been turned
3. for other people she is "just a famous lady" and many people feel something about famous people dying.

If your point wasn't just this question, then yes it's possible you didn't communicate it well, at least not well enough for me to understand it.


----------



## Zardnaar (Sep 10, 2022)

Tonguez said:


> Thats not at all true. The majority of republicans are of European descent
> 
> Even Hone Harawira is pro-monarchy, the Treaty of Waitangi was signed on behalf of Queen Victoria and is still held as a covenant between the British Monarch and Maori.




 The Maori aren't monolithic broadly speaking you have three types subdivided by iwi. Urban, traditional, tribal. 

 Not all iwi signed the treaty either so Ngai Tahu members often have very different opinions than say Ngai Puhi. 

 Urban Maori very different as well.


----------



## Morrus (Sep 10, 2022)

Zardnaar said:


> The Maori aren't monolithic broadly speaking you have three types subdivided by iwi. Urban, traditional, tribal.
> 
> Not all iwi signed the treaty either so Ngai Tahu members often have very different opinions than say Ngai Puhi.
> 
> Urban Maori very different as well.



 Seems I wasn’t clear enough about dropping this line of conversation. You're done in this thread.


----------



## Tonguez (Sep 10, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Sure, but it’s hardly the same. The Queen didn’t create art that is deeply meaningful for someone, she’s just a public figure.




Monarchy is about the maintenance of Tradition and the ceremonial heritage of a Nations identity, a nation which happens to have had a impact across the entire globe, so that everyone is affected to some degree

plus she was an attractive old girl, a muse to many and she did inspire a whole plethora of art


----------



## R_J_K75 (Sep 11, 2022)

Aeson said:


> Too soon, Dude. Betty hasn't been dead long enough for jokes about her death. Bad taste, man.. bad taste. smh



Its never too soon


----------



## aco175 (Sep 11, 2022)

Greatest generation.  Thank you for serving in the military.


----------



## GuyBoy (Sep 11, 2022)

Also, neither the Queen, nor the new King, ever came close to knighting Justin LaNasa, so he can stick his “Sir” where the sun don’t shine.


----------



## Dioltach (Sep 11, 2022)

GuyBoy said:


> where the sun don’t shine.



Glasgow?


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Sep 11, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> But like, for the rest of us this is basically a celebrity passing? Idk why Americans are passionate about it.






doctorbadwolf said:


> Sure, but it’s hardly the same. The Queen didn’t create art that is deeply meaningful for someone, she’s just a public figure. The celebration I’ve seen is especially confusing.
> 
> I toasted with friends when Thatcher died, but Her Majesty was hardly a Thatcher






Galandris said:


> Sorry, but your point seemed that you didn't undestand _why_ so many people felt something about her death, outside of the UK. What sort of answers are you expecting outside explanation that:
> 
> 1. for some people, she was the ruler of a country and it is not unusual for head of state to generate reactions among other people, especially when they are important/long running, even outside their home country.
> 2. for other people, she was associated with a saga that started with Lady Diana and continued with Meghan Marckle and William (or Harry, I don't know which is which) and made people magazine sell millions of issues, so they feel a page has been turned
> ...


----------



## Nutation (Sep 11, 2022)

Philip almost survived her, he only died last year. If Philip were still alive, what would his title be now, "Prince Father"? It would be unique.


----------



## MarkB (Sep 11, 2022)

Nutation said:


> Philip almost survived her, he only died last year. If Philip were still alive, what would his title be now, "Prince Father"? It would be unique.



King Father, presumably - same as Queen Mother.


----------



## Morrus (Sep 11, 2022)

MarkB said:


> King Father, presumably - same as Queen Mother.



According to Wikipedia, there's no precedent but --

"There is no male equivalent to a queen mother (i.e. "king father"). This would occur only if the husband of a queen regnant outlived the queen and was thereafter father to the new king or queen. Such a situation has never occurred. Since the title "queen mother" derives from the woman's previous title of "queen", it would also be incongruous to call such a father of a monarch the "king father", as the husbands of queens regnant are not given the title "king", but rather titled as a prince. The exact title such a person would assume has not been clarified by royal lineage experts. "Prince father" is a possibility."

Philip was never king. I kinda assumed 'queen mother' was like 'mother of the queen' but it seems its more 'mother who _was_ the queen'.


----------



## MarkB (Sep 11, 2022)

Morrus said:


> According to Wikipedia, there's no precedent but --
> 
> "There is no male equivalent to a queen mother (i.e. "king father"). This would occur only if the husband of a queen regnant outlived the queen and was thereafter father to the new king or queen. Such a situation has never occurred. Since the title "queen mother" derives from the woman's previous title of "queen", it would also be incongruous to call such a father of a monarch the "king father", as the husbands of queens regnant are not given the title "king", but rather titled as a prince. The exact title such a person would assume has not been clarified by royal lineage experts. "Prince father" is a possibility."
> 
> Philip was never king. I kinda assumed 'queen mother' was like 'mother of the queen' but it seems its more 'mother who _was_ the queen'.



He was most commonly referred to as the Duke of Edinburgh, so maybe Dukefather. But, in the event, it remains academic.


----------



## Ulfgeir (Sep 11, 2022)

MarkB said:


> He was most commonly referred to as the Duke of Edinburgh, so maybe Dukefather. But, in the event, it remains academic.



 For now...   Will take some time before it might happen again.


----------



## John R Davis (Sep 11, 2022)

Never realised until today that grandchildren of the monarch can be referred to as HRH. I think Archie/Lilibet should go for it!


----------



## Nikosandros (Sep 11, 2022)

Morrus said:


> According to Wikipedia, there's no precedent but --
> 
> "There is no male equivalent to a queen mother (i.e. "king father"). This would occur only if the husband of a queen regnant outlived the queen and was thereafter father to the new king or queen. Such a situation has never occurred. Since the title "queen mother" derives from the woman's previous title of "queen", it would also be incongruous to call such a father of a monarch the "king father", as the husbands of queens regnant are not given the title "king", but rather titled as a prince. The exact title such a person would assume has not been clarified by royal lineage experts. "Prince father" is a possibility."
> 
> Philip was never king. I kinda assumed 'queen mother' was like 'mother of the queen' but it seems its more 'mother who _was_ the queen'.



So, if I'm understanding things correctly, the wife of a king becames a queen consort, but the husband of a queen is a price consort. Is that correct? Camilla is now queen consort and if she should outlive Charles she could be called queen mother?


----------



## Cadence (Sep 11, 2022)

Morrus said:


> According to Wikipedia, there's no precedent but --
> 
> "There is no male equivalent to a queen mother (i.e. "king father"). This would occur only if the husband of a queen regnant outlived the queen and was thereafter father to the new king or queen. Such a situation has never occurred. Since the title "queen mother" derives from the woman's previous title of "queen", it would also be incongruous to call such a father of a monarch the "king father", as the husbands of queens regnant are not given the title "king", but rather titled as a prince. The exact title such a person would assume has not been clarified by royal lineage experts. "Prince father" is a possibility."
> 
> Philip was never king. I kinda assumed 'queen mother' was like 'mother of the queen' but it seems its more 'mother who _was_ the queen'.




And now I'm barely resisting the urge to see how "dowager" fits into this, and what the male equivalent of it is.


----------



## Galandris (Sep 11, 2022)

Nikosandros said:


> So, if I'm understanding things correctly, the wife of a king becames a queen consort, but the husband of a queen is a price consort. Is that correct? Camilla is now queen consort and if she should outlive Charles she could be called queen mother?




I don't think Camilla gave birth to any royal offspring. It would be an interesting, albeit unlikely, twist.


----------



## Nikosandros (Sep 11, 2022)

Galandris said:


> I don't think Camilla gave birth to any royal offspring. It would be an interesting twist.



Ah, I wan't thinking about that, but you are quite correct.


----------



## Aeson (Sep 11, 2022)

I suspect she would lose the title upon Charles's death. Diana would be Queen Mother if she had lived and they were still married. Curious what it would be if she were still alive but they were divorced.


----------



## Tonguez (Sep 11, 2022)

Nikosandros said:


> So, if I'm understanding things correctly, the wife of a king becames a queen consort, but the husband of a queen is a price consort. Is that correct? Camilla is now queen consort and if she should outlive Charles she could be called queen mother?




Camilla could possibly be Queen Dowager but she would not be Queen Mother as she is not the Mother of any royal heirs. But like Aeson I expect she’ll lose the title when William ascends



			
				Cadence said:
			
		

> And now I'm barely resisting the urge to see how "dowager" fits into this, and what the male equivalent of it is.




Dowager King-Consort is the term

Dowager refers to the Widow of one who is well endowed  with lands and isnt gender specific


----------



## Blue Orange (Sep 11, 2022)

Zardnaar said:


> Jokes here about our former head of state started turning up a few hours later.



I had the impression dark humour was sort of a British specialty?


----------



## Maxperson (Sep 11, 2022)

Cadence said:


> And now I'm barely resisting the urge to see how "dowager" fits into this, and what the male equivalent of it is.



I'm pretty sure the male equivalent is "nasdaqager"


----------



## delericho (Sep 12, 2022)

Nikosandros said:


> So, if I'm understanding things correctly, the wife of a king becames a queen consort, but the husband of a queen is a price consort. Is that correct? Camilla is now queen consort and if she should outlive Charles she could be called queen mother?



Normally, Camilla would just be called queen. Because of the circumstances with Diana, they've decided she'll be known as queen consort.

If she survives Charles, she would probably become the queen dowager - as noted, she wouldn't be queen mother as she isn't William's mother. (The precedent that I can think of is Catherine Parr, who was Henry VIII's widow, but wasn't mother to any of his children.)


----------



## TheSword (Sep 12, 2022)

delericho said:


> Normally, Camilla would just be called queen. Because of the circumstances with Diana, they've decided she'll be known as queen consort.
> 
> If she survives Charles, she would probably become the queen dowager - as noted, she wouldn't be queen mother as she isn't William's mother. (The precedent that I can think of is Catherine Parr, who was Henry VIII's widow, but wasn't mother to any of his children.)



That’s not true. The late Queen Mother was also Queen Consort while King George was alive. This distinguishes her between her daughter who was Queen Regent.

Queen consort has been going in England for a long time. It just gets shortened to Queen, just as Queen Regent does.


----------



## delericho (Sep 12, 2022)

TheSword said:


> That’s not true. The late Queen Mother was also Queen Consort while King George was alive. This distinguishes her between her daughter who was Queen Regent.



While her official title was technically "queen consort", she was commonly referred to simply as the queen. It's only with Camilla that the distinction is being clearly emphasised.


----------

