Why Philip Was Not Crowned King Alongside Elizabeth III: The Historical Significance of ‘King’

When it comes to the royal succession, the title of 'King' carries a significant historical weight that extends far beyond mere tradition. This article delves into why, historically, only male heirs were crowned as Kings, and why modern practices, such as Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall, and Catherine, the Duchess of Cambridge, do not receive the same title as their husbands.

Historical Context and Male Precedent

Historically, the role of King was often seen as a divine mandate, with male rule considered natural and ordained by God. The idea of a 'Queen' ruling in her own right was virtually unheard of until the mid-16th century. To provide some historical context, the last English monarch ruling in her own right was Mary Tudor, who reigned from 1553 to 1558. Mary's reign was a period of upheaval and conflict, as it was one of the few times in English history when a woman ruled the country without a male consort.

The Controversy Surrounding Female Rule

The succession of female monarchs led to significant controversy and rebellion. For instance, during the reign of Mary Tudor (also known as Mary I), John Knox, a leading figure of the Scottish Reformation, famously declared that female rule was "monstrous." Knox believed that women's rule was a divine punishment for the sins of Europe and that men should always govern. This sentiment was not unique to Knox; it was a widely held belief among many, including the nobility, who felt that it was improper for a woman to rule.

The Role of Male Succession in the Royal Line

The principle of male succession has deep historical roots. When the ruling line had no son, the elder daughter would typically assume the throne. This was the case for King George VI, whose eldest daughter, Elizabeth, was then next in line. In a more feudal and patriarchal age, the nobility would have often preferred to crown the male heirs over their mothers. The male heir was seen as the embodiment of chivalry, duty, and the divine right to rule, tasked by God with the responsibility of defending and ruling over his realms.

The Case of Philip and Elizabeth II

Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, never held the title of King because he did not possess the necessary royal lineage to make him a legitimate heir. Even though he was related to the royal family through multiple non-ruling lines, his connection to the throne was indirect and not direct enough to warrant the title of King. Similarly, his wife, Queen Elizabeth II, was crowned without her husband receiving the same title, as she was the eldest daughter of the late King George VI, who had no sons.

Modern Examples and Royal Titles

Now, consider modern examples such as Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall, and Catherine, the Duchess of Cambridge. Both wives support their husbands, assisting in public duties and representing the interests of the royal family, but they do not hold the titles or the rights of kingship. This is because the role of King is directly tied to the royal lineage and not to the personal achievements or position of the consort. As Camilla and Catherine continue to be by the sides of the current and future monarchs, they remain 'the Queen's husband' and 'the King's wife,' adhering to long-standing traditions of royal protocol.

The decision to not bestow the title of King on Prince Philip, and in modern cases, on other spouses of the line of succession, is rooted in a deeply ingrained societal and constitutional principle that prioritizes male lineage in the royal succession. This practice maintains the integrity and continuity of the royal lineage, ensuring that the role of King remains a symbol of tradition, history, and divine right rather than a title given to all royal family members.

Conclusion

The historical significance of 'King' is not merely about titles and traditions but also about the principles of male rule and the constitutional foundation of the British monarchy. The title of King is reserved for individuals who can trace an unbroken line of male succession, ensuring the stability and continuity of the throne. As modern royalty continues to navigate changing societal norms, the historical roots of the monarchy remain an important aspect of understanding the unique roles and titles within the royal family.