Kate Middleton Might Just Be Princess Consort When William Ascends The Throne

For traditional royalists who believed that one way of preserving the mystic and prestige of the crown is for royal princes marrying someone from the aristocracy, watching Prince William ended up with a non-aristocratic  commoner is a frustrating event.

 Kate Middleton might never become a Queen Consort

Prince William is the first British heir to marry a non-aristocratic commoner. They met while attending the same university in Scotland, and the same course, and lived in the same cottage.

Hardly a coincidence and many believed it was properly planned. And Carole Middleton was even accused of a schemer and had compared to Sir Thomas Boleyn, the father of Anne Boleyn, who placed his daughters in the royal court as ladies-in-waiting to attract the fascination of the king.

Well, that was a perception of some historians. Now, Carole Middleton has been accused of the same scheming for planning everything for her eldest child to get near Prince William including the choice of a university, choice of course, choice of a boarding cottage. All pointed to the same direction as Prince William.

And if planning a scheme to put your daughter to marry the future king is a form of investment. Carole Middleton is a brilliant investor.

However, one thing might never happen, to crown her daughter as a Queen Consort.

Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother who died in 2002, might be the last Queen Consort in British history

Lately, one Member of British Parliament expressed his intention to amend some provisions on the royal primogeniture laws.

Arguing that the world is now facing the challenges to head the call of the modern times, scrapping old traditions and refurbishing ancient laws seem a brilliant solution.

The British government under David Cameron earlier supported the changes in the law of succession, giving equal rights to daughters of the sovereign.

It means that a first born daughter of the monarch would no longer be bypassed by a younger son to succeed to the throne. 

Recognizing this change and the need to adopt more modern approaches so that monarchy would not appear old-fashioned and gone-with-the-ages.

Another amendment is now being pushed by MP John Hemming. That the wife of a king will no longer be called "Queen Consort" but only "Princess Consort".

‘It’s not right that a Queen Regnant is treated as less important than a King Regnant,’ Hemmings was quoted telling the Sunday Express. ‘It seems sensible we resolve this issue when dealing with the primogeniture issue.’
His Royal Highness, Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh.
He is not King Philip despite being the husband of a Queen because there's no provision in the constitution that defines the role of a husband of the Queen other than a Consort so there's no reason why a King's wife will be treated different.

The ancient tradition of monarchy on the treatment of a sovereign's spouse is somewhat bias. When a king ascends the throne, his wife would automatically assume the title of a Queen and would be crowned with him, but not if the sovereign is a female.

There's no specific law in the constitution defining the role of a Queen's husband other than being a consort. That's why husbands of the current European Queens: Elizabeth II of Britain, Margrethe II of Denmark and Beatrix of the Netherlands are only called "Prince Consort".

Hemming's argument sounds logical and this might be considered by the Parliament. If the Queen's husband would not be given an equal constitutional right what is the difference is there for the wife of a king?

In other parts of the world, there are wives of kings who are not called Queens. In Jordan, a wife of a king needs to be declared queen first before she could take the title, the second wife of King Hussein (father of the current Jordanian King, Abdullah) was not declared as Queen, thus, only called Princess Muna. In Morocco, the wife of King Mohammed VI takes the title of a Princess (Princess Lalla Salma).
Prince Charles and Camilla during their wedding last April 2005. Camilla would not be known as Queen when Charles ascends the throne but would only take the title of a Princess Consort

For Charles, the Prince of Wales, this proposal will not pose big trouble as he already announced years ago that his second wife, Camilla, would not be crowned with him when he ascend the throne and not be called Queen but would take the lesser title "princess consort". They  are both divorced when they get married.

What is the difference between these two titles?

While a Queen consort will be crowned with the King during the coronation ceremony at the Abbey and would occupy a seat with him at the altar and possibly shared with sensitive information about the state, a princess consort will not yield important role other than stand and accompany the monarch on ceremonial functions.

She will not also be crowned and sat with the King at the altar during the coronation ceremony and she will walk two steps behind the King on public engagements. In other words, a Princess consort is purely ceremonial and would not expect to perform the roles and duties of a Queen Consort.

Post a Comment