Timeline of British Monarchs

     Here, I give some commentary on the Timeline. If you would rather skip right to the Timeline, you can access the link here. 

     For the past two weeks, I have been working on this Timeline of British Monarchs. It was inspired by an opinion article I read in a Scottish newspaper which remarked that the British Royal Family must really be the "English Royal Family", since we have been told by the media that the recently-born Prince George is in line to become the 45th monarch since William the Conqueror. 

     Since counting monarchs beginning with William is an English-only concern, it is understandable that some Scots feel bristled when such facts and figures are thrown around. This speaks to the issue of how Scotland's role in the history of the monarchy and in British history in general has in some respect been under-represented in favor of focusing predominately on the English part.

Elizabeth II is Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Northern Ireland, not Queen of England.

     
     In fact, the current British royal line is as much Scottish as English. In some respects, it can be argued that the royal family has stronger roots in Scotland than in England. After all, it was a Scottish king, James VI, who in 1603 traveled from Edinburgh to London to claim his English inheritance as James I of England and Ireland because Elizabeth I of England and Ireland had failed to produce an heir of her own, and James was her closest living relative. 

     All British monarchs have since been descended from James VI & I, who was a promoter of closer social and political ties among the peoples of the British Isles. His vision was eventually realized when England and Scotland merged in 1707 to become Great Britain, and later in 1801 when Ireland and Great Britain came together to form the United Kingdom.

The Union Jack is the National Flag of the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Northern Ireland, not the flag of England itself.

      What my timeline hopes to achieve is a greater understanding of the relationship between the separate kingdoms and monarchies of England and Scotland, and how the distinct entities became one and the same. It also explains why Elizabeth II is not Queen of England or Queen of Scots because both of those titles became extinct and were abolished upon the union of 1707. She is Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (or more simply, Queen of the United Kingdom, Queen of the UK, Queen of Great Britain  and Northern Ireland, Queen of Great Britain, or Queen of Britain), and has only ever been addressed and titled as such. 

     To Elizabeth II the Queen of England shows an ignorance to the fact that England is a part of the United Kingdom, along with Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales, and makes it appear as though those areas are nothing more than appendages of England, which is an idea that is patently offensive to people who live in those areas. In general terms, the Northern Irish, Scots, and Welsh view the English as their fellow British countrymen and women, and look to Elizabeth II as their queen. 

     Last year during the Olympics, all of the peoples of Britain came together to support Team GB regardless of what part of the UK the individual athletes came from. However, the Northern Irish, Scots, and Welsh do not appreciate being lumped in as being "English." A recent example of this occurred back in June of this year when Andy Murray - a Scot - became the first British man since 1936 to win at Wimbledon, and the New York Times referred to him as "English," which created a backlash among Scots and people of Scottish descent before it was corrected. 

     Certainly, England has been confused with the UK for a long time, but there has been an increasing awareness of the non-English peoples of the United Kingdom as an integral part of Britain's past, present, and future. When it comes to the monarchy, most timelines I have seen feature only the English monarchs, and tend to ignore the unions that took place in 1603, 1707, and 1801. Even the monarchs after the 1707 Anglo-Scottish union are sometimes referred to as "King and Queens of England", which is not correct.

Map of the United Kingdom and its constituent parts:
England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales

     This is why producing the timeline was important to me. I want to show that Prince George is destined to be the successor of British monarchs going back to 843 A.D. with Kenneth MacAlpin in Scotland and 871 A.D. with Alfred the Great of England (which further shows the mistake of counting back only to William the Conqueror since English monarchs existed before his 1066 conquest). 

     Indeed, it can be argued that I could have gone further back, but to do so would introduce the fact that England and Scotland were made up of several smaller petty kingdoms. Kenneth I founded a dynasty that would preside over the unification of Scotland into a single state, just as Alfred the Great had a similar effect in England.

     Eventually, England (with Wales) merged with Scotland to become Great Britain, and English and Scottish monarchs became British monarchs. According to my count, Prince George will be the 61st monarch since Kenneth I of Scotland as well as the 61st monarch since Alfred the Great of England. 

     As have said before, this project became more complex and detailed by the day. First, at the completion of the timeline itself, there was an abundance of excessive space in the areas where I had named the royal houses of the monarchs. So I decided to fill up such space with illustrations of the royal coats of arms, emblems, and shields used by successive monarchs over the centuries (courtesy of Sodacan on Wikipedia), as well as illustrations of the national flags of England, Scotland, Great Britain, and the United Kingdom. 

     When that was done, I realized that I perhaps needed to provide explanations for these illustrations, which resulted in an appendix containing detailed information on these various symbols of the British nation and monarchy. Then, another appendix was creating which listed the top ten longest reigning monarchs on British history, complete with images of the kings, queens, and princes who served for 40 or more years. 

     After finishing that, there was still some space on the margins of the Microsoft Excel sheet I was working on, which resulted in the placement of the anthems and patriotic songs of the nations of the United Kingdom, as well as the UK National Anthem, God Save the Queen. 

     Along the way, many modifications and adjustments had to be made to keep the timeline, text, and images as proportional as possible and without ruining the basic outlines and structure of the timeline, which meant a lot of trial-and-error to ensure that what I saw on the spreadsheet also appeared when I converted it to a PDF format.

     I must stress that the earlier history of Britain, its monarchy, and symbols can be cloaked in a mixture of legend and fact. I tried to base what I said in the timeline on as much fact as possible by explaining legends but also establishing known truths. But like most things in early history, myth, fact, and legend can often be inseparable.

     That being said, I hope that this timeline will help to view the British monarchy in a different light, with it being as much a Scottish institution as an English one. The Scottish and English monarchs (and their respective royal houses) are listed side-by-side before becoming a single British entity. With all of the illustrations and information packed into it, I hope the Timeline can lead to a better of understanding of British royal and national symbols, as well as the history of the monarchy itself and how it came to be. 

   Without further ado, here is my 

  

Timeline of British Monarchs.

     
     In order to view it correctly, click on the above link, and once the page is loaded, click on the printer symbol below the "File,View, Edit, and Help" tabs, or press the "CTRL" and "P" together. Either of these actions will operate the“Print (PDF)” function. A window prompt may ask you to send the document to a printer. Just click “No” or "Cancel" so you can view the Timeline. If that does not work, you may click "File" and then "Download" to view the timeline. If you are using a mobile device, you may need to use desktop settings to access these controls.

     You can also choose to view the Timeline as it is on the main Google Docs page, but be warned that the process of uploading to Google Docs resulted in the quality of the images being substantially reduced and the text formatting changed from "Times New Roman" to "Arial". I could not find a way to rectify this (and it appears this an ongoing issue for Google Docs). That is why I provided the instructions above to ensure that you see the Timeline properly, and fully appreciate the work that was put into it. 

Photo Credit: Matt Lewis via Wikimedia Commons cc

Why Kate Is Not "Princess Catherine"

An explanation of the rules concerning royal titles in the United Kingdom.

     

     An issue that has had some people scratching their heads is the fact that while William is listed as Prince William, Kate is not listed as Princess Catherine on the birth certificate of their son, Prince George.

"What? She's not a princess? She's just a duchess?
Eh, we'll just call her Kate Middleton, then."
-The Mainstream/Popular Press

     It is often assumed that by marrying a prince, the wife becomes a princess, and as such, is titled and styled as a princess. This is true

On the day of her wedding,
Catherine Middleton became
Princess William, Duchess of Cambridge.

in the sense that the wife bears the feminine form of her husband’s titles, but does not bear these titles in her own right. For example, in a marriage in which a woman named Miss Jane Doe marries Mr. John Smith, she becomes known as Mrs. John Smith. In Kate’s case, as Catherine Middleton, she married Prince William, Duke of Cambridge, so she officially became Princess William, Duchess of Cambridge (and if William had not been created Duke of Cambridge and remained Prince William of Wales, she would have become Princess William of Wales). So Kate is a princess, but only because William is a 

Prince and Princess Michael of Kent.
The Prince bears an uncanny resemblance
to his late grandfather, King George V.

prince of the blood royal, and as such, her title of “princess” is derived from his own. Another example is that of Marie Christine von Reibnitz, who married Prince Michael of Kent – a cousin of the Queen – and became Princess Michael of Kent. The same rationale goes for any aristocratic titles a prince may possess. For example, Prince Michael's older brother Prince Edward succeeded to their father's title – Duke of Kent. Therefore, when Edward married Katherine Worsley in 1961, she became Princess Edward, Duchess of Kent. 

King George V established much of the
current rules regarding royal titles.

     To be titled and styled as a British prince or princess in one’s own right is reserved only to the children of a monarch, male-line grandchildren of a monarch, and the children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales. These rules were established through Letters Patent by King George V – the present Queen’s grandfather – during World War I to limit the dignity and style of prince or princess to a monarch’s immediate family (and especially to deprive British princely titles from his German relatives of the House of Hanover, who were descendants of King George III). The rules were modified in 2012 by the Queen to ensure that any child of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge would be styled as prince or princess (because hitherto, this had only applied to the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales). 

     For this reason, William’s mother Diana was never officially known as Princess Diana, because as Lady Diana Spencer, she 

Diana was never a princess in her own
right, so references to her as
Princess Diana are incorrect.

married Prince Charles, Prince of Wales, and as a result, became Princess Charles, Princess of Wales. When Diana and Charles divorced in 1996, like a divorced Mrs. John Smith who becomes Mrs. Jane Smith, Diana became officially known as Diana, Princess of Wales.  The rules also explain why the daughters of Prince Andrew, Duke of York – the Queen’s third child – are styled as Princess Beatrice of York and Princess Eugenie of York, since they are male-line grandchildren of the monarch, while the children of Princess Anne – the Queen’s second child and only daughter – have no titles and are known as Peter Phillips and Zara Phillips (who is formally Mrs. Michael Tindall since her marriage in 2011 to rugby player Mike Tindall), as they are grandchildren of the female-line. 

Princesses Eugenie and Beatrice of York

Peter and Zara Phillips.
Photo: BBC Video

     Speaking of Princess Anne, it should go without saying that like any woman who does not pass her name to her husband, a princess does not pass the masculine form of her birthright titles to her husband upon marriage. A man who marries into the royal family may be granted aristocratic titles (if he does not already have titles of his own). This occurred when the Queen’s sister, Princess Margaret, who in 1960 married photographer Antony Armstrong-Jones, who became Earl of Snowdon prior to the birth of their first child David, because it was unheard of for the children of British princes and princesses not to have a title, or be in line for a title. The result was that Margaret’s husband became Antony Armstrong-Jones, Earl of Snowdon (thereafter becoming professionally known as Snowdon) and she became Princess Margaret, Countess of Snowdon, taking the feminine form of his title as an earl, but he did not take the masculine form of her birthright title of princess. Later, when Princess Anne married her first husband Captain Mark Phillips in 1973, the couple reportedly turned down aristocratic titles from the Queen. The result was that before she was granted the title of Princess Royal (which is customary, though not automatic, for the eldest daughter of a monarch) in 1987, Anne was officially styled as Princess Anne, Mrs. Mark Phillips. It also 

Princess Anne

meant that their eldest child Peter became the first legitimate grandchild of a British monarch not to have either an aristocratic or royal title in around 500 years. Anne is currently 11^th in the line of succession, and turning down titles was reportedly done to help Peter (12^th in line) and Zara (15^th in line) to have a relatively low-profile life and to encourage them to find their own career pursuits independent of being grandchildren of Elizabeth II (with Peter being an event manager/promoter and Zara being an accomplished equestrian rider). 

     But what about Prince Philip? He married into the royal family, didn’t he? Philip’s story of royal titles requires a bit more explanation. He was born as Prince Philip of Greece and Denmark, but prior to his and Elizabeth’s engagement being announced in July 1947, he renounced his Greek and Danish titles to become a naturalized British citizen and adopted the surname of his mother’s family in the United Kingdom, Mountbatten.

The marriage register of Elizabeth and Philip.

Subsequently, he became known as Philip Mountbatten, and was later given a knighthood, titles, and the status of Royal Highness by his future father-in-law George VI in time for the wedding in November. But the king did not give Philip the dignity and style of a prince, so in full, he was styled as His Royal Highness Philip Mountbatten, Duke of Edinburgh. George VI did issue Letters Patent allowing Philip and Elizabeth’s children to be styled as prince or princess with the status of Royal Highness. Otherwise, the Queen’s first two children, born before her accession in 1952, would have been styled as children of a duke – Charles Mountbatten, Earl of Merioneth and The Lady Anne Mountbatten (as opposed to HRH Prince Charles of Edinburgh and HRH Princess Anne of Edinburgh) – since they were female-line grandchildren of George VI. In 1957, the Queen made Philip a Prince of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and since then, he has been known as His Royal Highness Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, which resulted in the Mountbatten surname being dropped from official usage in exchange for the princely title. Basically, Philip was born a prince in his native country (Greece, where he had lived for less than a year-and-a-half as a baby), gave up his birthright titles to marry Elizabeth, and was restored to the dignity and style of a prince in his adopted country. 

     Another major exception is that of the children of Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex – the Queen’s fourth and youngest child. At the time of his marriage to Sophie Rhys-Jones in 1999, it was announced via press release that per the wishes of the couple, their children would be styled as the children of an earl, rather than that of a prince. This was done for much the same reason as Princess Anne and Mark Phillips did for their own children – to allow them to have an existence largely independent of Palace life (especially considering their position in the line of succession – 9^th and 10^th – and the unlikelihood that either of them stand a chance of attaining 

Earl and Countess of Wessex

the throne). The result is that their daughter is known as The Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor, whilst their son is known as James Mountbatten-Windsor, Viscount Severn. Some constitutional and historical experts believe that the personal wishes of Edward and Sophie as well as the 1999 Palace press release are not enough to override the Letters Patent issued in 1917 by George V which stipulates that male-line grandchildren of a monarch are afforded the dignity and style of a prince or princess. As such, they contend that the Earl and Countess of Wessex’s children ought to be styled as Princess Louise of Wessex and Prince James of Wessex. 

     The example of Edward’s children shows that these rules can appear to be academic, archaic, and wonkish. Nevertheless, these are the rules (or at least the bulk of them) regarding royal titles and how they are obtained in the United Kingdom, and they explain why we will never see Kate’s name spelled out in official terms as Princess Catherine.

Photo Credit: ComradeFoot via Flickr cc, esther1616 via photopin cc, Crisco 1492 via Wikimedia Commons cc, Northern Ireland Office via Flickr cc, Carfax2 via Wikimedia Commons cc, Carfax2 via Wikimedia Commons cc