Succession to the Crown Act 2013, Part 1: 2011 - Sep 2022

[AnnEliza]

I bet you any money Camilla will be Queen.

I'm with you!

 

[royalistbert]

I don't want to sound morbid but it will be automatic. The country will be mourning for the queen. The who'd Princess Consort idea will be forgotton. The public will unite behind the new King and Queen.

 

[Baroness of Books]

I also believe Camilla will become queen; it flies too much in the face of convention for her not to be.

 

[scooter]

I'm not challenging the information but I can't find it on the site. Could you tell me where to look? Thanks in advance.

Edited to add: I see it now!

Too bad.

If Andrew PB is to be believed, it was one Camilla's objections to marrying Charles rather than continue as they were. She was adamant that she did not want to be queen. I am at the aquarium with the kid at the moment, but I will look up the quote tomorrow. If she really doesn't want it, then why should anyone else insist?

 

[cinrit]

If Charles makes it to the throne, which in all probability he will, it won't matter what Camilla is known as. She will be Queen Consort. She knows that.

 

[Mariel]

Phillip was Prince since his marriage. Camilla would be following precedent to become Princess rather than queen. This is a nicer title than Queen Consort, which sounds like she is nothing except for Charles consorting with her. Of course she would not be following precedent of the Queen Mother Elizabeth. Camilla could then remain a Princess if Charles predeceases her. She would have a nice title belonging to her alone, like Princess Alice of Gloucester, who chose this title with the queen's permission after her son married and there was another Duchess of Gloucester in her family. Alice didn't like the title Dowager Duchess, and I don't blame her. It's awkward for Camilla if she becomes a widow, as she can't be called Queen Mother; she is not William's mother. As Princess she can go on indefinitely even with a new Queen. That's all speculation, of course, as to who will pass on first, Charles or Camilla.

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

Well I don't think this has a hope in heck of passing, so Camilla will become Queen Consort on Charles' ascension.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Phillip was Prince since his marriage.

Philip wasn't a Prince from early 1947 until 1957.

He gave up his Greek and Danish titles - and I am not going to go into that debate here as it has taken up pages elsewhere - but in his mind he stopped being a Prince when he took the name Lt Philip Mountbatten.

The day before his marriage he was made a Knight of the Garter and so woke up on his wedding day as Lt Sir Philip Mountbatten. On 20th November, 1947 he was created HRH The Duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Merioneth and Baron Greenwich but he was NOT created a prince.

There is even a story of a member of the King's staff, recording the shoot at either Balmoral or Sandringham, writing 'Prince Philip' and the King crossed out the word 'Prince'.

In 1957 The Queen created Philip a Prince by using Letters Patent to that effect so for 10 years Philip wasn't a Prince at all.

 

[Artemisia]

Phillip was Prince since his marriage. Camilla would be following precedent to become Princess rather than queen. This is a nicer title than Queen Consort, which sounds like she is nothing except for Charles consorting with her. Of course she would not be following precedent of the Queen Mother Elizabeth. Camilla could then remain a Princess if Charles predeceases her. She would have a nice title belonging to her alone, like Princess Alice of Gloucester, who chose this title with the queen's permission after her son married and there was another Duchess of Gloucester in her family. Alice didn't like the title Dowager Duchess, and I don't blame her. It's awkward for Camilla if she becomes a widow, as she can't be called Queen Mother; she is not William's mother. As Princess she can go on indefinitely even with a new Queen. That's all speculation, of course, as to who will pass on first, Charles or Camilla.

I am afraid some of what you say is not exactly accurate.

Prince Philip was born a Prince of Greece and Denmark but he renounced his foreign titles and styles. Thus, he was not a Prince at the time of his marriage and didn't become one until the Queen issued Letters Patent of 1957 granting him the title of a British Prince - 10 years after their marriage. The husband of a British Queen doesn't automatically acquire any title or style. For instance, should Princess Anne somehow become a Queen Regnant, Timothy Lawrence wouldn't get any new titles unless and until new LPs are issued to the effect.


Camilla would not be following any precedent should she be a Princess Consort. In Britain the wife of the King is automatically a Queen - end of story. The only way Camilla will legally be The Princess Consort is if the Parliaments of all countries of the Realm pass legislations specifically depriving Camilla of a title that would otherwise be rightfully and automatically hers the moment Charles ascends to the Throne - and chances of that happening are virtually non-existent.
The only way (that I found plausible) for Camilla to be known as The Princess Consort, while at the same time legally being The Queen Consort, is if she is granted the title Princess Consort in her own right and then chooses to be known under the lesser of her two available titles (rather like she is known as The Duchess of Cornwall now, while legally being The Princess of Wales).


If Charles were to predecease Camilla after his accession to the Throne, she will be known as Her Majesty Queen Camilla, while the new Queen Consort will be Her Majesty The Queen. There will be no awkwardness; it has happened many times before, and there were plenty of examples when the widow of the previous Monarch was not the mother of the next one (for instance, Queen Adelaide and Queen Victoria).

If Charles were to predecease Camilla before his accession to the Throne, she will be known as The Dowager Duchess of Cornwall (or The Dowager Princess of Wales; both titles will be hers as the widow of the Prince of Wales). That title will be uniquely hers too because should Charles die before he becomes King, Prince William would never be The Duke of Cornwall and, consequently, his wife wouldn't be the Duchess of Cornwall.

 

[cinrit]

The wife of a King is a Queen Consort, without exception, just as the Queen Mother was, all the way back to medieval times. Should Charles predecease Camilla, and should he have been King at that time, Camilla would probably be known as something like Dowager Queen Consort. Princess Alice was known as Princess in her own right because the Queen allowed her to keep the title rather than taking the title of Dowager Duchess, but I don't remember why.

 

[Artemisia]

The wife of a King is a Queen Consort, without exception, just as the Queen Mother was, all the way back to medieval times. Should Charles predecease Camilla, and should he have been King at that time, Camilla would probably be known as something like Dowager Queen Consort. Princess Alice was known as Princess in her own right because the Queen allowed her to keep the title rather than taking the title of Dowager Duchess, but I don't remember why.

If Charles predeceases Camilla after his accession to the Throne, she will be known as Her Majesty Queen Camilla and will be The Dowager Queen Consort.
If Charles predeceases Camilla before his accession to the Throne, she will be the Dowager Duchess of Cornwall (although she'll probably continue to be known simply as The Duchess of Cornwall, especially since there will be no new Duchess of Cornwall for decades).

Princess Alice didn't want to be known as the Dowager Duchess simply because she disliked the styling; she thus asked the Queen to be known "Princess Alice", rather like the Dowager Duchess of Kent was styled simply as Princess Marina (the difference was of course that Marina was born a Princess, whereas Alice hadn't been). The Queen granting the wish since she considered that Alice was a British Princess (by marriage) anyway.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Queen Alexandra and Queen Mary continued to be known as Queen Alexandra and Queen Mary in the reigns of their sons and granddaughter in the latters case.

Camilla would be HM The Queen during Charles' reign and then Queen Camilla.

The main reason why The Queen Mum used that title was that she would have been Queen Elizabeth as well as her daughter.

Queen Adelaide remained as Queen Adelaide into Queen Victoria's reign.

No need for Camilla to be called 'dowager'.

If Charles predeceases Camilla after his accession to the Throne, she will be known as Her Majesty Queen Camilla and will be The Dowager Queen Consort.
If Charles predeceases Camilla before his accession to the Throne, she will be the Dowager Duchess of Cornwall (although she'll probably continue to be known simply as The Duchess of Cornwall, especially since there will be no new Duchess of Cornwall for decades).

We don't know how long it will be before there is another Duke of Cornwall. It Kate's baby is a boy he will instantly be Duke of Cornwall the moment his father becomes King.

Now if Charles were to predecease his mother there would be a new Duke of Cornwall not too long afterwards - certainly not decades (I don't see The Queen living another 20+ years).

 

[Artemisia]

We don't know how long it will be before there is another Duke of Cornwall. It Kate's baby is a boy he will instantly be Duke of Cornwall the moment his father becomes King.

Now if Charles were to predecease his mother there would be a new Duke of Cornwall not too long afterwards - certainly not decades (I don't see The Queen living another 20+ years).

Firstly, what with Equal Primogeniture laws (granted, they still need to be accepted), William's eldest son will not automatically become The Duke of Cornwall upon his father's accession to the Throne. If he has an elder siste, the title will either be vacant, or the rules of inheriting the title will be changed from "the heir apparent who is also the eldest son of the Sovereign" to "the heir(ess) apparent who is also the eldest child of the Sovereign".

And secondly, I wasn't talking about the next Duke of Cornwall - I mentioned the next Duchess of Cornwall. If Charles predeceases the Queen, then regardless of when William's son becomes The Duke of Cornwall (if he does), it will be at least a couple of decades until there is a new Duchess, unless someone reinstates the medieval practice among monarchies of child marriages. And if Charles doesn't predecease the Queen, than the issue of "uniqueness" of Camilla's title (the comment I was responding to) won't even arise since Camilla will be the Dowager Queen Consort and will be known as Her Majesty Queen Camilla, while William's wife will be the new Duchess of Cornwall.

 

[Roslyn]

The only way Camilla will legally be The Princess Consort is if the Parliaments of all countries of the Realm pass legislations specifically depriving Camilla of a title that would otherwise be rightfully and automatically hers the moment Charles ascends to the Throne - and chances of that happening are virtually non-existent.

I can understand why the consent of the realms is required to change the laws regarding the succession, but I don't understand why our consent would be required to legislation regarding the spouse of the monarch.

The (UK) Statute of Westminster, 1931, provides that:

"No Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom passed after the commencement of this Act shall extend or be deemed to extend, to a Dominion as part of the law of that Dominion, unless it is expressly declared in that Act that that Dominion has requested, and consented to, the enactment thereof."

The (Australian) Statute of Westminster Adoption Act, 1942, provides that Statute provided that laws made by the UK Parliament would only have effect on a Dominion at the request of the government of that Dominion.

The Australian Constitution provides a role for the Queen of the UK - at the relevant time Queen Victoria - and her heirs and successors. The UK sovereign from time to time is our monarch, so legislation changing the laws regarding the succession by making it by equal primogeniture does have effect on us. However there is no role for any member of the UK Royal Family other than the sovereign, so legislation relating to the sovereign's spouse is irrelevant to us and has no effect on us so there is no reason for us to have to consent.

Am I missing something?

 

[Trillian]

Further to Roslyn's post above, is this affected and how, by the "Royal Styles and Titles Act ", Commonwealth of Australia 1973?

 

[Mariel]

Thanks everyone for clarifying this incredibly complex title issue. I'm relieved that Queen Camilla would not have to be Dowager or Queen Mother.

 

[Roslyn]

Further to Roslyn's post above, is this affected and how, by the "Royal Styles and Titles Act ", Commonwealth of Australia 1973?

I'm not sure what you have in mind here. This is that Act: Royal Style and Titles Act 1973
It's a piece of Australian Federal Government legislation, relating to how HM is titled and styled in relation to Australia and its territories.

 

[Osipi]

Phillip was Prince since his marriage. Camilla would be following precedent to become Princess rather than queen. This is a nicer title than Queen Consort, which sounds like she is nothing except for Charles consorting with her. Of course she would not be following precedent of the Queen Mother Elizabeth. Camilla could then remain a Princess if Charles predeceases her. She would have a nice title belonging to her alone, like Princess Alice of Gloucester, who chose this title with the queen's permission after her son married and there was another Duchess of Gloucester in her family. Alice didn't like the title Dowager Duchess, and I don't blame her. It's awkward for Camilla if she becomes a widow, as she can't be called Queen Mother; she is not William's mother. As Princess she can go on indefinitely even with a new Queen. That's all speculation, of course, as to who will pass on first, Charles or Camilla.

I thought Philip became the Duke of Edinburgh on his marriage. It wasn't till 1957 that his wife, the Queen, made him a Prince of the UK.

OK.. question. When Charles becomes King, he will also become the Duke of Lancaster correct? Couldn't Camilla then be styled as The Duchess of Lancaster if she chose?

 

[Lumutqueen]

I thought Philip became the Duke of Edinburgh on his marriage. It wasn't till 1957 that his wife, the Queen, made him a Prince of the UK.

OK.. question. When Charles becomes King, he will also become the Duke of Lancaster correct? Couldn't Camilla then be styled as The Duchess of Lancaster if she chose?

You're right with the DOE thing, but Camilla cannot be the Duchess of Lancaster. Philip isn't the Duke of Lancaster, his wife is.

 

[Osipi]

You're right with the DOE thing, but Camilla cannot be the Duchess of Lancaster. Philip isn't the Duke of Lancaster, his wife is.

Thanks. Just wondered if it'd be a go. Even though his wife was queen, he couldn't be a king but I thought that if Charles held the Duke of Lancaster title, it might be possible for Camilla to use the feminine version of it.

 

[wbenson]

The title of "Duke of Lancaster" is sort of a fiction anyways. There's a Duchy of Lancaster held by the monarch, but there isn't really a duke anymore since the sovereign can't also be a peer. The Queen has approved its use in toasts, though, so it's not entirely dead.

 

[Iluvbertie]

The Queen is referred to as The Duke of Lancaster in the CC when she attends meeting of the Duchy, just as Charles is referred to as The Duke of Cornwall when he attends meetings of the Duchy of Cornwall.

Queen Victoria would use Duchess of Lancaster when she travelled 'incognito' as well.

 

[Kataryn]

She is "duchess of Normandy" as well, as there is a rest of Normandy under her reign - the Channel Islands. They came under the English rule when their duke became king of England in 1066 and have stayed so, but AFAIK they are still considered part of the old "Normandy", thus they are covered by the rule that the souverain can't be a peer, as here she is the souverain of another realm. But I'm not sure how they dealt with that when they formed the Uk in the 1700s. They included Wales in England, what happened to Normandy's rest?

 

[Alison H]

I think the idea of replacing the title of "Queen" with "Princess Consort" is just a suggestion by a maverick MP who isn't keen on royalty full stop: I can't see any way it'll become law.

As far as Camilla's concerned, the whole "Princess Consort" thing, like being known as "the Duchess of Cornwall" when legally she's the Princess of Wales, is a sop to people who're obsessive about Diana. What happened to Diana was tragic, but hopefully by the time Charles becomes king people will have moved on from it and Camilla will have the title of queen.


It's not even just a royal issue. If Lady Diana Spencer had married Mr Bloggs, he would still have been plain Mr Bloggs. However, when Lord X marries, his wife becomes Lady X. If Sir John Smith gets married, his wife becomes Lady Smith. If Dame Jane Smith gets married, her husband remains plain Mr Whatever. & so on. No-one seems to be suggesting messing with all that: this MP probably just wants to get his name in the press!!

The title of "Duke of Lancaster" is sort of a fiction anyways. There's a Duchy of Lancaster held by the monarch, but there isn't really a duke anymore since the sovereign can't also be a peer. The Queen has approved its use in toasts, though, so it's not entirely dead.

I live in Manchester, Lancashire, and toasts in Lancashire are always to "The Queen, Duke of Lancaster" ... but in the rest of the country they just say "The Queen" - so it's our bit of local pride ! I'd never thought of Camilla being referred to as the Duchess of Lancaster, but I rather like that ... although as far as I'm concerned the king's wife is the queen, end of.

In historical records for Lancashire, Queen Victoria is sometimes referred to as "Queen Victoria, Duchess of Lancaster," but that's incorrect - Queens Regnant are Dukes of Lancaster.

The Queen's also the Duke of Normandy, as someone else said, and Lord of Mann (i.e. the Isle of Man).

 

[An Ard Ri]

Thanks everyone for clarifying this incredibly complex title issue. I'm relieved that Queen Camilla would not have to be Dowager or Queen Mother.

Camilla would never be the Queen Mother as she has no children with the Prince of Wales.

Queen mother - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Alison H]

Camilla would never be the Queen Mother as she has no children with the Prince of Wales.

Queen mother - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm not convinced Wikipedia's right there. As I understand it, Queen Mother is just a "nicer" term for Queen Dowager as in the widow of a king, rather than meaning the mother of the current monarch. I think Queen Victoria's mother was keen to use something similar, but couldn't as she'd never been queen.

Queen Alexandra and Queen Mary were never known as "the Queen Mother". I think it was used for the late Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother mainly because her daughter was also called Elizabeth and having two people known as "Queen Elizabeth" as the same time would have been too confusing.

 

[Lumutqueen]

As far as Camilla's concerned, the whole "Princess Consort" thing, like being known as "the Duchess of Cornwall" when legally she's the Princess of Wales, is a sop to people who're obsessive about Diana.

It was Camilla who chose to be known as The Duchess of Cornwall after her marriage, she's extremely mindful of the world she came into in 2005. Diana carried a lot of weight in this world and Camilla needed to show she wasn't about the come in step on everyones toes. It was a great choice. It was Charles and the BRF press wheel that mentioned The Princess Consort issue first, that was to keep Diana fans at bay.

Queen Victoria is sometimes referred to as "Queen Victoria, Duchess of Lancaster," but that's incorrect - Queens Regnant are Dukes of Lancaster..

Someone earlier posted the fact Victoria used the Duchess of Lancaster when she wished to travel without anyone knowing.

I'm not convinced Wikipedia's right there. As I understand it, Queen Mother is just a "nicer" term for Queen Dowager as in the widow of a king, rather than meaning the mother of the current monarch. I think Queen Victoria's mother was keen to use something similar, but couldn't as she'd never been queen.

Queen Alexandra and Queen Mary were never known as "the Queen Mother". I think it was used for the late Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother mainly because her daughter was also called Elizabeth and having two people known as "Queen Elizabeth" as the same time would have been too confusing.

You're right in that it was used for QM because her daughter was named Elizabeth. But if you look at Wikipedia's Queen Dowager page, you'll see Queen Mother listed alongside Queen Dowager and Dowager Queen. Wikipedia has a separate page for Queen Mother's because it lists Queen Mothers not just Dowager Queens. Difference being you can be a Dowager Queen and not a Queen's Mother.

 

[Osipi]

As far as Camilla's concerned, the whole "Princess Consort" thing, like being known as "the Duchess of Cornwall" when legally she's the Princess of Wales, is a sop to people who're obsessive about Diana. What happened to Diana was tragic, but hopefully by the time Charles becomes king people will have moved on from it and Camilla will have the title of queen.

Yes, Camilla is legally The Princess of Wales but she's also legally The Duchess of Cornwall and The Duchess of Rothesay in Scotland. When Camilla married Charles, she became entitled to use the feminine version of any of Charles' titles as her style.

This is what got me thinking on perhaps the Duchess of Lancaster. Its been stated that as Charles would no longer be a prince, Princess Consort would be something that would have to involve legislature. If he is King Charles, Duke of Lancaster, then perhaps she'd be legally the Duchess of Lancaster as the roles are written now.

I really do think though after watching and reading all the discussions and in and outs about equal primogeniture, they'll probably just pass it for the line of succession to the Crown. Everything else will go by the book and tradition as far as titles and styles go. Parliament has much more pressing matters to deal with than debate what Camilla should or should not be called.

 

[An Ard Ri]

I'm not convinced Wikipedia's right there. As I understand it, Queen Mother is just a "nicer" term for Queen Dowager as in the widow of a king, rather than meaning the mother of the current monarch. I think Queen Victoria's mother was keen to use something similar, but couldn't as she'd never been queen.

Queen Alexandra and Queen Mary were never known as "the Queen Mother". I think it was used for the late Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother mainly because her daughter was also called Elizabeth and having two people known as "Queen Elizabeth" as the same time would have been too confusing.

Queen Mother is a widowed or Dowager queen consort,who is the mother of a reigning monarch,hence the word 'mother'. Queen Alexandra and Queen Mary technically were Queen Mothers but they didn't use that style.

A current example of a Queen Dowager is H.M.Queen Fabiola of the Belgians who's the widow of King Baudouin and the sister in law of the present King.Other famous Queen Mothers were Catherine de Medici and Anne of Austria as they were both Queen Dowagers and the 'mothers' of reigning monarchs.

 

[Queen Penelope]

I'm not convinced Wikipedia's right there. As I understand it, Queen Mother is just a "nicer" term for Queen Dowager as in the widow of a king, rather than meaning the mother of the current monarch. I think Queen Victoria's mother was keen to use something similar, but couldn't as she'd never been queen.

Queen Alexandra and Queen Mary were never known as "the Queen Mother". I think it was used for the late Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother mainly because her daughter was also called Elizabeth and having two people known as "Queen Elizabeth" as the same time would have been too confusing.

I agree with you, it's a polite term to describe the widow of a King (certainly nicer sounding than Dowager!!). To my recollection (which is not to say it never happened!) in the BRF no previous Dowager Queens or Queen Mothers were ever called/styled as such, they continued to be known as HM Queen ________ (even though they were a Dowager Queen or mother of the monarch). The style of The Queen Mother was just to differentiate between Queen Elizabeth the mother and Queen Elizabeth the daughter. You'd often hear reference to "HM Queen Elizabeth, The Queen Mother" (even if it was more frequently shortened to "The Queen Mum"). Had she been Marguerite Angela Elizabeth, rather than Elizabeth Angela Marguerite, she would have undoubtedly been called Queen Marguerite till her passing, not The Queen Mother.