A message to those who have been confused by a recent announcement from Buckingham Palace: The Queen’s name is Camilla.
It might seem strange, two years into the reign of King Charles III, to have to state the obvious in such stark terms. But the statement from the Palace that The Queen was unwell and would have to miss several engagements seemed to throw some people off course.
Bold statements emerged on social media following the news that the royals had named the wrong person in their announcement. For, as those keyboard warriors opined, the person in the smaller Crown on Coronation Day 2023 is Queen Consort Camilla and how very dare you get this wrong.
(BBC still/ fair use)
There were others who, like many a person born in the reign of Elizabeth II, still automatically thought of the great Monarch when the words ‘The Queen’ appeared. That’s kind of inevitable. For seventy years, Elizabeth II was The Queen. In thirty years time we’ll be telling our grandchildren that the national anthem, sung for The King, is God Save The Queen. Some old habits just fall hard.
However, there were others who quickly filled themselves to the brim with angry indignation that the wrong title was being used for Camilla. She is, they stated categorically and with no evidence at all, Queen Consort Camilla. How dare the Palace call her The Queen? It doesn’t matter that it’s the Monarchy calling her The Queen. They’re wrong, get with the programme.
Some even went so far as to quote Elizabeth II back at the Royal Family she steered for so long. In February 2022, Her Late Majesty said she wanted her daughter in law to be Queen Consort when the time came for a new reign to begin. Why, they asked, is everyone ignoring the truth that was spoken by The Queen and calling The Queen, well, The Queen?
And therein lies the rub, for the word consort is a position not a title. Elizabeth II was a female regnant, holder of the top job. Her title was The Queen. As in all royal set ups, the spouse of the Monarch is the consort. When a woman holds the power, and becomes Her Majesty, her male partner gets no similar majestic title and remains a prince, sometimes with consort appended to their name, otherwise just plain prince.
However, it’s different for male monarchs – isn’t it always? When a man takes the throne and becomes regnant, their title is The King. And their female spouse becomes their consort. But while their role is Queen Consort rather than Queen Regnant, their title is The Queen.
The reason for this disparity is all to do with those (not so) distant times when people genuinely believed a woman couldn’t reign in the same way that a man did. In 1553, Mary Tudor became England’s first queen regnant. When she married Philip of Spain, she wanted him to be known as king. But it was presumed back then that as soon as you gave a man that title, he immediately superseded his wife, regardless of her claim to power or ability to wield it. So there was no king consort role for Philip.
Queen Victoria considered making Albert her king consort but, again, it was believed that any whisper of that title would catapult him to the Crown. A woman’s ability to rule depended on her husband not being given a title. The same rules still apply in the 21st century.
(i-Images/ Pool)
Right now, if a woman were to ascend to the throne, her male spouse would never be called king consort cos, obvs, boys automatically outrank girls if you give them similar titles what with equality and all that. However, a female spouse to a female regnant would become queen consort.
And can you imagine the confusion that would cause? For there would be two women entitled to be called The Queen?
Right now, there’s only one woman who can claim that title, Her Majesty Queen Camilla. The Queen is on the mend and hopes to return to public engagements in time for Remembrance weekend. Whether there will be a better understanding of her title by then remains to be seen.
