Big Beat Steve Posted July 23, 2013 Report Posted July 23, 2013 Has anybody from the (former) Monty Python crew weighed in yet with their comments? I'd bet what they have to say would be a hoot! Quote
Big Wheel Posted July 23, 2013 Report Posted July 23, 2013 The Onion's ongoing coverage of this event has been quite stellar. http://www.theonion.com/articles/the-onions-coverage-of-the-royal-baby,33214/ Quote
Brad Posted July 24, 2013 Report Posted July 24, 2013 I just don't get this continuing coverage here in the US. I understand the UK, but not here. Quote
JSngry Posted July 24, 2013 Report Posted July 24, 2013 Craig Ferguson on late night TV taking the piss now You can always rely on a Scotsman Letterman took it out there last night as well. Quote
Scott Dolan Posted July 24, 2013 Report Posted July 24, 2013 OK, I don't get it. Why would this cat be a king? There isn't even a king now, right? Quote
Aggie87 Posted July 24, 2013 Report Posted July 24, 2013 Currently he's a Prince, not a King. Once Elizabeth dies, Charles becomes the King. Once Charles dies, William becomes King. Once William dies, Prince Babyboy becomes King. I read somewhere that his regnal name will be George, regardless of what his actual name ends up being. Dunno if that's true or not. Quote
J.A.W. Posted July 24, 2013 Report Posted July 24, 2013 Currently he's a Prince, not a King. Once Elizabeth dies, Charles becomes the King. Once Charles dies, William becomes King. Once William dies, Prince Babyboy becomes King. Or not (there's always hope). Quote
Scott Dolan Posted July 24, 2013 Report Posted July 24, 2013 (edited) Guess I just never understood why the queens husband wasn't the king. Thanks for the explanation, though. Edited July 24, 2013 by Scott Dolan Quote
Soulstation1 Posted July 24, 2013 Report Posted July 24, 2013 They should name him Lamont, Rollo or Grady My 2 cents worth Quote
Aggie87 Posted July 24, 2013 Report Posted July 24, 2013 (edited) Guess I just never understood why the queens husband wasn't the king. Thanks for the explanation, though. I'm not the best person to answer this, but: King Edward abdicated the throne to marry a divorced American, Wallis Simpson. At that point Edward's younger brother George became King of England. Further info: One becomes a reigning monarch, a sovereign, by inheriting that position from the former sovereign according to certain rules of primogeniture. Elizabeth II became queen upon the death of her father, King George VI because she was the oldest child and had no brothers. If she had had a brother, even a younger one, he would have become king. As it is she, being the oldest daughter, became queen. When a king is married his wife becomes queen simply by virtue of being his wife but she is only the queen consort, queen by virtue of being the consort of the king. She is not the sovereign. Elizabeth on the other hand, because she inherited the position, is the sovereign which is a very different thing. There is no such thing as a king consort. A man is either king, the reigning sovereign, or he is not. Generally when a man marries a queen he is accorded the title of prince, that is prince consort. Elizabeth is married to Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh. Prince Philip is related to the royal family of Denmark, the former royal family of Greece, and several royal families of Germany. He is a member of the House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glucksburg. Styled a prince at birth, he renounced his royal titles before he married Princess Elizabeth. Her father created him Duke of Edinburgh and gave him several other titles the day before the wedding. A couple of years ago the U.K. changed the law so that a first born child of the ruler, regardless of gender, becomes next in line to be ruler. So if William & Catherine's baby had been a girl, she would be next in line after William. Edited July 24, 2013 by Aggie87 Quote
Scott Dolan Posted July 24, 2013 Report Posted July 24, 2013 Seems pretty convoluted for a figurehead... Quote
Blue Train Posted July 24, 2013 Report Posted July 24, 2013 (edited) Guess I just never understood why the queens husband wasn't the king. Thanks for the explanation, though. He wasn't even made a Prince, or the rarely used King consort. That the Queen can do on her own. To be a King on par with the Queen....it would need parliament's approval, which is why Prince Albert was only made Prince consort with Queen Victoria....even though she wanted to make him equal to her. Elizabeth Duex didn't even make Phillip a Prince of the UK until 5-years after she became Queen. P.S. Like many royals in Europe....they're related. They're 3rd cousins. A couple of years ago the U.K. changed the law so that a first born child of the ruler, regardless of gender, becomes next in line to be ruler. So if William & Catherine's baby had been a girl, she would be next in line after William. Actually that law just went into a effect a few months ago. It had to be approved by all the 16 Commonwealth realms. Edited in a correction. I meant to say he wasn't made a Prince of the UK until 5-years after she was Queen and not after they were married. Only her father could have done that before becoming Queen. Edited July 24, 2013 by Blue Train Quote
BruceH Posted July 24, 2013 Report Posted July 24, 2013 (edited) Basically couldn't give a rat's arse but my guess is that he will be named James, George or Edward, with an outside chance of Richard. I would say there's not much chance of the royals breaking the pattern of traditional king's names. I'm hoping for "Owen." Or "Nigel." Edited July 24, 2013 by BruceH Quote
Jazzmoose Posted July 24, 2013 Report Posted July 24, 2013 Oliver Sounds about as likely as Guy... Quote
A Lark Ascending Posted July 24, 2013 Report Posted July 24, 2013 (edited) John would be good. We've only had one. I'm sure there's lots of fights to be had with the church. Actually, I'd recommend going back before the dynasty that can be traced back (at a stretch) to the Normans - how about some good Anglo-SAxon royal names: Hengest Horsa Oisc Octa Eormenric Æðelberht I Eadbald Æðelwald Eorcenberht Eormenred Ecgberht I Hlothhere Eadric Mul Swæfheard Swæfberht Oswine Wihtred Ælfric Eadberht I Æðelberht II Eardwulf Eadberht II Sigered Eanmund Heaberht Ecgberht II Ealhmund Eadberht III Præn Cuðred Cœnwulf Ceolwulf Baldred Ecgberht III Æðelwulf Æðelstan I Æðelberht III Æðelred I Cerdic Cynric Ceawlin Ceol Ceolwulf Cynegils Cwichelm Cenwalh Penda Cenwalh Seaxburh Cenfus Æscwine Centwine Caedwalla Ine Æthelheard Cuthred Sigeberht Cynewulf Beorhtric Egbert Æthelwulf Æthelbald Æthelbert Æthelred Alfred the Great Edward the Elder Ælfweard? Æthelstan And that's just the Kings of Kent and Wessex. There's some good Viking ones too. Canute could be a good one - trying to drive back the the forces of modernisation and equality (using the alternative spelling - Cnut - is just inviting trouble. Always causes my dyslexic students problems). The Prince Formerly Known As ... We have a winner! Edited July 24, 2013 by A Lark Ascending Quote
mjazzg Posted July 24, 2013 Report Posted July 24, 2013 (edited) Perkin only a history teacher........Lambert, maybe? Edited July 24, 2013 by mjazzg Quote
alankin Posted July 24, 2013 Report Posted July 24, 2013 Although Æðelwulf has a nice ring. The Royals are a good value for my tax dollar. Not sure why I should care, though. And everyone is astonished that dad can buckle a car seat! Quote
Royal Oak Posted July 24, 2013 Report Posted July 24, 2013 (edited) Prince schmince. I can't believe there are people out there who give a shit. I mean, people take time out of their lives to go and hang out at the hospital, or in the Middletons' home village. What the fuck for? What the fuck could it possibly have to do with you? Excuse the profanity, but the UK populace's interest in the Royals has always pushed my buttons. Phew Edited July 24, 2013 by rdavenport Quote
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.